Re: Ingram, et al - "Hard Core Dharma" & claims of attainment
Posted: Fri Aug 05, 2011 4:45 pm
Buddhist forum about the Dhamma of Theravāda Buddhism
Hi Dardos,darods wrote:
I causes me sadness to think of people who fall into a situation whereby they consider themselves to achieved something and in doing so distract themselves from continued striving. I hope they get back on track!
I have to agree with you there. This thread has provided an on and off bit of amusmement to me every time it pops up in the active topics. A lot of people seem to interested in judging others. Just human nature i guess. Doesnt "mind your own business and dont be judgemental" appear anywhere in the scriptures? Anybody got a cite for that?gnulnx wrote: I think this thread appears to
provide an open book to the thoughts of many of the posters.
Good quotes. Also this famous one:cooran wrote: ‘’Therefore, Ananda, you should not be a hasty critic of people, should not lightly pass judgement on people. One who passes judgement on people harms himself. I alone, Ananda, or one like me, can judge people.’’
‘’Such judgement, indeed, will for a long time cause harm and suffering to those critics.’’
From AN 6.44
It is true that the Buddha never slandered or abused anyone. He was completely free from jealousy and ill-will. However, he certainly did say some things that were displeasing to others. When he started teaching the Dhamma, the Brahmins were well-established as the “Church” of the day. They held that the Brahmins or priests were a superior caste to workers, farmers, merchants, and nobles. The Buddha ridiculed them in many ways, both in private with his loyal disciples and in public when non-believers were present. They lost most of their support, and conspired to discredit the Buddha by hiring a prostitute to pretend she had had an affair with him, then hiring some thugs to murder her.
The Buddha also criticised evil-doers among his own followers and constantly admonished his loyal disciples not to be heedless. He said, “Ānanda, I will not treat you [gently] as a potter treats an unbaked pot. I will instruct and admonish you repeatedly [robustly if necessary]. The sound core will stand the test.”
http://www.aimwell.org/Forums/forums.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Given the rather unskilful approach taken here, your comments probably do not help.gnulnx wrote: Will my comment add to the peace or decrease the peace?
First of all, Zen has nothing to do with the issue at hand, but if someone grossly misrepresented Zen, is it delusion and dogmatic to offer a critique of the misrepresentation? So if someone's critical analysis of Ingram’s claims, claims which run counter to the very core texts of the tradition of this forum, then offering a critique is to be delusional and dogmatic, so it seems. Now, that characterization could, with equal justification, be seen as equally problematic as the critique of Ingram’s claims.I decided to post because I think this thread appears to
provide an open book to the thoughts of many of the posters.
In short this thread makes me sad. The delusion and dogma appear to be quite steep with some members. Is this a Buddhist forum were the members make constant strides to be aware of every passing thought or is this a random religious forum focused on dogmatic detail to scripture? Is Ingrams book any more contradictory than the whole of Zen?
That is your opinion; however, the question is taking the whole picture of what Ingram is offering into consideration; there are better options.Can any of you honestly find fault with Ingrams teaching on meditation? His chapter on correct meditation are about as concise and accurate as any I've as of yet found.
So, in other words, if a person has a problem with Ingram, the problem is with that person, not the fact that Ingram has distorted the Buddha’s teachings and that Ingram's claims of being an arahant run counter to the words of the Buddha.Is it possible that the only real issue you have with him is a claim he made? Claiming something that a part of you obviously considers taboo? Ponder this in it's entirety. Don't focus on whether he is an Arahat or not. Focus on that part of you that is reacting to some part of Ingram? What is it about him that causes your mind to push back in such away?
Then why would Ingram make such a claim about himself? Since he has, all by himself, put that claim out there, it is open for discussion (why wouldn’t it be?), and since he is using a Buddhist category –arahant – in his claim of “enlightenment” that is also not at all unreasonably open for discussion. And disagreeing with Ingram does not all by itself mean that whomever disagrees with his claim is delusional or dogmatic. There is no justification for such a claim as that.Lastly, what would you require of a person as proof of their enlightenment? Are you sure it's even possible for a human to meet that definition?
Looking at the failure of another’s teaching does mean that those who are doing the looking are full of aversion. It might mean quite the contrary – a very deep concern for the welfare of others and wanting the Dhamma to be carefully and skilfully presented in a way that does not bring shame to it.I[sic] appears that often times we become so focused on the inaccuracies of another persons teaching that we fail to realize the real lesson was to found in the observation of our own aversion.
Yes, well said.tiltbillings wrote:Looking at the failure of another’s teaching doesn't mean that those who are doing the looking are full of aversion. It might mean quite the contrary – a very deep concern for the welfare of others and wanting the Dhamma to be carefully and skilfully presented in a way that does not bring shame to it.
http://www.interactivebuddha.com/contact.shtml" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;Oh, yes, a brief warning. I should mention that I am hardcore, into hardcore practice, into very hard-hitting dharma, and sometimes I let it out with both barrels. [...] I expect people to be self-reliant to a high degree, and projections both negative and positive tend to piss me off. I probably should be more understanding, but clearly at times am not. If it happens with you and you are sure nothing good came of it, my apologies, but at least you were warned.
EDIT: page #"An example of an extreme case is Daniel M. Ingram, an American student of Sayādaw U Paṇdita of Myanmar. Daniel M.
Ingram claimed himself to be a diehard follower of Mahāsi method and a non-returner. He also had been authorized and
encouraged to teach Mahāsi method by his teachers. In his book titled Mastering the Core Teachings of the Buddha, he states
on page 237 that non-returners and arahants are quite capable of doing such things as sleeping with prostitutes, smoking
crack, cheating on their partners, or even killing beings, regardless of the traditional belief that they have completely
eliminated greed, lust, and anger. Also on page 239, he states that it is an utter nonsense of the text to state that arahants
cannot have orgasms."
...Daniel M. Ingram, an American student of Sayādaw U Paṇdita of Myanmar...
He also had been authorized and encouraged to teach Mahāsi method by his teachers.
I could see it being true. Maybe he was more "normal" back then. Then he got the endorsement. And some time later, well . . . look at this thread!waterchan wrote:...Daniel M. Ingram, an American student of Sayādaw U Paṇdita of Myanmar...He also had been authorized and encouraged to teach Mahāsi method by his teachers.
I strongly doubt the authenticity of both credentials. You can technically call yourself a student of Sayadaw Whoever if you've taken a class or two under him. And I highly doubt that Mahasi Sayadaw himself would have approved of Mr. Ingram as a teacher of the Mahasi method.