Ingram, et al - "Hard Core Dharma" & claims of attainment

[Cittasanto]

http://psychologytomorrowmagazine.com/i ... d-science/

To say that MRI malfunctioned is to ridicule Harvard scientist's incompetency, which I know is not the case.

the article you quote says nothing about the brain disappearing.

I think that this is the excerpt which practitioner is refering to :
"Lying on their padded gurneys in the center of the humming MRI in this famous research hospital in the heart of East Boston and Harvard Medical School, each of the two research subjects suddenly… disappeared."

A careful reading shows that they do not indicate whether it was the subjective experience of the subjects which lead to the idea that they "disaappeared" or whether it was the mri machine's data which indicated that they had "disappeared". In other words, they do not say explicitly that the mri machine showed anything unusual and it might be that the subjects were simply stating that they experienced a "disappearance" while in the machine.
chownah

Hi Chownah,
The article is directly refering to consciousness, and meditative experiance at this point, there is no reason to think it was to do with the mri readings.

Kind Regards
Cittasanto

[chownah]

[Hi Chownah,
The article is directly refering to consciousness, and meditative experiance at this point, there is no reason to think it was to do with the mri readings.

Kind Regards
Cittasanto

I think you very well may be correct...but the article does not state clearly what is meant that I could see. I am not too worried about what this article wrote because if someone who meditates is able to stop the signals coming from their brain so that an mri reads nothing there then for sure we will very soon hear more about it as it will be the object of intense study I am sure. I am not holding my breath however.
chownah

[Cittasanto]

[Hi Chownah,
The article is directly refering to consciousness, and meditative experiance at this point, there is no reason to think it was to do with the mri readings.

Kind Regards
Cittasanto

I think you very well may be correct...but the article does not state clearly what is meant that I could see. I am not too worried about what this article wrote because if someone who meditates is able to stop the signals coming from their brain so that an mri reads nothing there then for sure we will very soon hear more about it as it will be the object of intense study I am sure. I am not holding my breath however.
chownah

Agreed,

[practitioner]

fMRI measures changes in blood flow, so if an enlightened being has no thoughts then blood flow remains steady. Why would you see the brain in fMRI? You wouldn't.

I have heard enlightened beings sleep but remain conscious during sleep.

[chownah]

fMRI measures changes in blood flow, so if an enlightened being has no thoughts then blood flow remains steady. Why would you see the brain in fMRI? You wouldn't.

I have heard enlightened beings sleep but remain conscious during sleep.

I think we are getting way off topic here although the discussion of the topic seems to have pretty much stopped. ANyway, there are more things going on inside the brain then just thoughts so even if all thoughts were stopped the brain would be active so blood flow would not remain steady. I think in the fmri you would not only see changes in blood flow but from the data collected you would be able to see the brain overall as well its many divisions.
chownah

[davidbrainerd]

Regarding the above quotes from the Buddha I don't see them as dualistic. The process of letting go body, sensations, perceptions, volitions and consciousness lays bare the following: since there is nothing else that constitutes a person, when every constituent is abandoned as being not self, there is nothing left to even be considered self. So there is no self.

As for Ingram's teachings, I think they are compatible with some hermeneutical approaches to the suttas. If you try to be make a charitable interpretation of his writings, I think it is the case of the mentioned paragraph that it is compatible with buddhist doctrine.

His teaching is that arhats have neither cut off the taints nor fetters...there is no hermeneutical approach that can make that work with the suttas other than the hermeneutic of dishonesty.

His interpretation of anatta, on the otherhand, we could argue about forever, as with any other interpretation of anatta. But his interpretation of arhats, and thus of the goal and whole point of Buddhism is unquestionably wrong and thus irredeemable.

[Inedible]

Is there some way to read through all 68 pages of this without having to click through?

[Dhammanando]

Is there some way to read through all 68 pages of this without having to click through?

I don't think so. But if you don't wish to read all of it, page 2 alone should suffice to show how radical a breach there is between Ingram Dhamma and Buddha Dhamma.

[Mahabrahma]

Reading page 2, and Dhammanando's informative post it seems to me like Ingram is taking the approach from a unique perspective on how the Dhamma is to be interpreted by seeming to deny some core aspects, but I don't think He is denying them, just expanding them with modern terminology from a certain point of view. I wouldn't take His approach, and I oppose denying the Buddhist Truth in any real school of Buddhism, but He seems to be preaching to an audience who want to take a stance on the Suttas that entail an inconceivable to some aspect of an Arhat or a Buddha with regards to their behaviour. Gautama Buddha could be that drunk on the street, Enlightening the homeless people living in tents, so that in twenty years they can all meet in a monestary. Are we to ignore and mistreat, or shun the Tathagata in such conditions, or tell Him He is not following His own Suttas? Are we to deny the Buddha in a lowly condition? We need to have an approach of Mahakaruna and I am glad there are many different approaches to Buddhism and I am thankful for that, and I am glad there are those who are wise enough to see things as they are.

I fully respect complete adherence to the written Dhamma, because it won't fail you if you are a True Buddhist. These are very troubling times for human society, so I think the Dhamma and Buddhism is the best cure. Send waves of Metta to our Buddhist brothers and sisters, and throughout the rest of humanity.

[SteRo]

... page 2 alone should suffice to show how radical a breach there is between Ingram Dhamma and Buddha Dhamma.

That hint has stirred my ignorant curiosity to read on page 2 because usually I am not interested in what self-proclaimed teachers have to say. Nevertheless it's been informative and to learn about present day developments in terms of dhamma/buddhisms can have some benefits in terms of getting clear knowledge about one's own views and how one experiences these novel views of what might be called "heretics" from the perspective of theravada tradition. Maybe what Ingram teaches may be called a variant of novel "secular buddhism"? It is certainly influenced by Mahayana thought because the Mahayana traditionally works on pulling down the doctrinal barriers between "the world" and "the enlightened". It also seems to be based on the affirmation of self views.

[Inedible]

Maybe we just need a new thread. And only let people in who have read his book.

[mikenz66]

Here's a more recent thread that includes a link to Bhikkhu Analayo's critique:
https://www.dhammawheel.com/viewtopic.php?f=13&p=562699


Mike

[SteRo]

Maybe we just need a new thread. And only let people in who have read his book.

Why? Are you dissatisfied with Gotama's teachings and looking for something else?

[Inedible]

It is nice to think that there are still people in the world who have followed Buddha's teachings to the end and gotten the results. People who can answer questions about what they did and how it felt. People who can say which teachings they emphasized and which ones they had trouble with. This is why we also have the Sangha and not just Buddha and Dharma.

[SteRo]

It is nice to think that there are still people in the world who have followed Buddha's teachings to the end and gotten the results. People who can answer questions about what they did and how it felt. People who can say which teachings they emphasized and which ones they had trouble with. This is why we also have the Sangha and not just Buddha and Dharma.

Ingram certainly hasn't followed "Buddha's teachings to the end and gotten the results" Gotama talked about. At some point he obviously took another direction and ended up with a different result. That is not meant to denigrate his result but it obviously it isn't the result Gotama talked about.
The forum knows a forum user who also claimed to have attained nibbana. Nobody knows what that user has attained but he obviously deviated from Gotama's teachings.
i guess there are many in this world who claim having attained nibbana referring to Gotama but actually have attained something different.