Are we ready for the deep teachings?

[phil]

Hi all

Are we ready for the deep teachings? I for one just love to dig in and get my sticky hands and dusty eyeballs all over them...it's slightly farcical at times. Pop open a sutta anthology and skim over it while munching breakfast, scanning for points that provide me with good feelings for the day ahead...No harm done, I guess. Unless I begin to believe that my understanding is in the same league as the big boys...

See the point where it is discussed whether deep teachings should be shared with householders, either Ananda or Anaatapindika tell Saariputta, yes, there are some householders whose eyes are free of dust and are ready for the deep teachings...

"In that case, Ven. Sariputta, please let this sort of talk on the Dhamma be given to lay people clad in white. There are clansmen with little dust in their eyes who are wasting away through not hearing [this] Dhamma. There will be those who will understand it."

http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka ... .than.html

Phil

[Lazy_eye]

It depends. Does it require celibacy?

[Bhikkhu Pesala]

One who is wise is ready for deep teachings:

18. "But here some woman or man when visiting a monk or brahman, asks: 'What is wholesome, venerable sir?... Or what, by my doing it, will be long for my welfare and happiness?' Due to having performed and completed such kammas, on the dissolution of the body, after death, he reappears in a happy destination... If instead he comes to the human state, he is wise wherever he is reborn. This is the way that leads to wisdom, that is to say, when visiting a monk or brahman, to ask: 'What is wholesome, venerable sir?... Or what, by my doing it, will be long for my welfare and happiness?'

It's difficult and onerous teaching the Dhamma to those who show little or no interest. It's easy and delightful teaching those who ask questions after doing their research, and who are eager to learn.

Then there are some who just want to debate. Teaching them is almost impossible.

[Sanjay PS]

One who is wise is ready for deep teachings:

18. "But here some woman or man when visiting a monk or brahman, asks: 'What is wholesome, venerable sir?... Or what, by my doing it, will be long for my welfare and happiness?' Due to having performed and completed such kammas, on the dissolution of the body, after death, he reappears in a happy destination... If instead he comes to the human state, he is wise wherever he is reborn. This is the way that leads to wisdom, that is to say, when visiting a monk or brahman, to ask: 'What is wholesome, venerable sir?... Or what, by my doing it, will be long for my welfare and happiness?'

It's difficult and onerous teaching the Dhamma to those who show little or no interest. It's easy and delightful teaching those who ask questions after doing their research, and who are eager to learn.

Then there are some who just want to debate. Teaching them is almost impossible.

So wonderfully put across Venerable Sir , strikes a parallel to an on-going OP of challenges which is of no consequence .

With much respects to the Triple Gem ,
sanjay

[Lazy_eye]

One who is wise is ready for deep teachings:
It's difficult and onerous teaching the Dhamma to those who show little or no interest. It's easy and delightful teaching those who ask questions after doing their research, and who are eager to learn.

Then there are some who just want to debate. Teaching them is almost impossible.

Speaking personally, I'm interested and eager to learn, but I also find that I run into a serious obstacle when I go deeper into the teachings. It's not the celibacy issue per se -- that's more or less an external, surface issue having to do with rules of training in a monastic vs lay context.

The deeper issue is that the Dhamma categorizes emotional and physical intimacy (much of what we call love) as "akusala", which means that as long as one is involved in such relationships, one is intentionally choosing to cultivate or at least not abandon some akusala mind states. Therefore one's mindfulness practice is incomplete, and one is not abiding fully by the Injunction to "abandon that which is unwholesome, cultivate what is wholesome, purify the mind." One is in effect practicing Wrong Intention or maybe Partially Right Intention, as well as Mixed Mindfulness.

On the other hand, if one cultivates and develops a view of sexual intimacy as unwholesome, to the point that one actually starts to view things this way, the result can be damaging to a relationship. The difficult fact is that what is good for the welfare of a marriage is not always what is wholesome in Dhammic terms. That is the dilemma laypeople like me run into once we have reached a certain degree of understanding concerning the Dhamma.

Hence my question earlier in the thread -- which probably should have been elaborated a little further.

[Mkoll]

One who is wise is ready for deep teachings:
It's difficult and onerous teaching the Dhamma to those who show little or no interest. It's easy and delightful teaching those who ask questions after doing their research, and who are eager to learn.

Then there are some who just want to debate. Teaching them is almost impossible.

Speaking personally, I'm interested and eager to learn, but I also find that I run into a serious obstacle when I go deeper into the teachings. It's not the celibacy issue per se -- that's more or less an external, surface issue having to do with rules of training in a monastic vs lay context.

The deeper issue is that the Dhamma categorizes emotional and physical intimacy (much of what we call love) as "akusala", which means that as long as one is involved in such relationships, one is intentionally choosing to cultivate or at least not abandon some akusala mind states. Therefore one's mindfulness practice is incomplete, and one is not abiding fully by the Injunction to "abandon that which is unwholesome, cultivate what is wholesome, purify the mind." One is in effect practicing Wrong Intention or maybe Partially Right Intention, as well as Mixed Mindfulness.

On the other hand, if one cultivates and develops a view of sexual intimacy as unwholesome, to the point that one actually starts to view things this way, the result can be damaging to a relationship. The difficult fact is that what is good for the welfare of a marriage is not always what is wholesome in Dhammic terms. That is the dilemma laypeople like me run into once we have reached a certain degree of understanding concerning the Dhamma.

Hence my question earlier in the thread -- which probably should have been elaborated a little further.

There's a sutta about a guy with multiple wives who gains stream-entry and a stream-enterer has definitely penetrated the deep teachings to an extent. One could ask if he was celibate in the time leading up to his attainment and if so, for how long? Guess we'll never know.

[cooran]

As I understand it, Sensual desire is not eradicated until one becomes a non-returner.


With metta,
Chris

[Bhikkhu Pesala]

Venerable Rewata Dhamma once told me about a couple of his Vipassanā meditation students who asked him how one should practice mindfulness during sex. His reply was, “Work when you work, play when you play.”

[Ben]

Just practice.
Sila, Dana, Samadhi, Panna, particularly Bhavana.
Kind regards,
Ben

[Ben]

Venerable Rewata Dhamma once told me about a couple of his Vipassanā meditation students who asked him how one should practice mindfulness during sex. His reply was, “Work when you work, play when you play.”

My he Venwrable Rewata Dhamna appears to be quoting Sayagi U Ba Khin from The Essentials of Buddha Dhamma in Meditative Practice.
Kind regards,
Ben

[SarathW]

Venerable Rewata Dhamma once told me about a couple of his Vipassanā meditation students who asked him how one should practice mindfulness during sex. His reply was, “Work when you work, play when you play.”

Bhante Pesala
I like to know your reply, if someone ask the same question from you.

[DNS]

As I understand it, Sensual desire is not eradicated until one becomes a non-returner.

Yes, exactly; sometimes there is the tendency to do the arahantification of sotapannas. However, sotapannas are not arahants and yet quite advanced in the practice, guaranteed never to fall back to lower realms.

Sarakani liked to drink alcohol and did so pretty much all the way to his deathbed. The Buddha identified him as a sotapanna (stream-entrant). Then some monks complained that Sarakani could not have been a stream-entrant as this lay person indulged in alcohol. But the Buddha remarked that, "Sarakani the Sakyan undertook the training at the time of his death." Samyutta Nikaya 55.24

Of course we should avoid all alcohol and I'm sure most of us here do, but even he made it to this noble level while drinking (most?) of his adult life.

[SarathW]

Hi Phil
Your question is similar to a question "Are you ready to climb the mount Everest?" from a group of ambitious mountain climbing group.
It depend on the different skill set, resources and physical strength.
We all can read abut mountain climbing and just try to climb rock in our back yard.

Fortunately Noble Eight Fold Path is for every one with different skill sets and resources.
We all should set our goal to attain the highest goal Nibbana.
However we should understand the limitation of each person.
As a lay person we have a limit on how far we can travel in the path.
Considering the fact journey is more important than the destination, just entering the path is such a beautiful experience.

[Mkoll]

As I understand it, Sensual desire is not eradicated until one becomes a non-returner.

Yes, exactly; sometimes there is the tendency to do the arahantification of sotapannas. However, sotapannas are not arahants and yet quite advanced in the practice, guaranteed never to fall back to lower realms.

Sarakani liked to drink alcohol and did so pretty much all the way to his deathbed. The Buddha identified him as a sotapanna (stream-entrant). Then some monks complained that Sarakani could not have been a stream-entrant as this lay person indulged in alcohol. But the Buddha remarked that, "Sarakani the Sakyan undertook the training at the time of his death." Samyutta Nikaya 55.24

Of course we should avoid all alcohol and I'm sure most of us here do, but even he made it to this noble level while drinking (most?) of his adult life.

Granted, he did attain stream-entry at death and not during his days as a drinker. So he literally left his training to the last minute. I would think he wasn't drunk when he died.

Edit: Here's Ven. Bodhi's note at the end of the sutta in his SN translation.

Spk says that at the time of his death he was a fulfiller of the three trainings (in virtue, concentration, and wisdom). This implies that while he might have indulged in strong drink earlier, before his death he undertook strict observance of the precepts and thereafter attained stream-entry.

This goes back to the question I asked about the length of time of celibacy (or teetotalism) leading up to an attainment. Right now I'd say it probably depends upon a particular individual's prior spiritual development and kamma. And of course how diligent they practice.

[Jetavan]

So he literally left his training to the last minute. I would think he wasn't drunk when he died.

He wasn't DWI -- Dead While Intoxicated?