Re: Is a Teacher required to practice meditation?
Posted: Mon Oct 17, 2011 1:57 pm
You can even find one and avail yourself of her/his teachings. There's a radical thought.
A Buddhist discussion forum on the Dhamma of the Theravāda
This is not exactly a definition but perhaps is worth thinking about:
1. You can see a form and think "teacher".
2. You can hear a sound and think "teacher".
3. You can smell an odor and think "teacher".
4. You can taste a flavor and think "teacher".
5. You can feel a bodily sensation and think "teacher".
6. You can experience a thought and think "teacher".
What else can there be to a teacher?
I just read that.Ben wrote:Hi Daniel
You might like to have a read of Ven Analayo's "Satipatthana: the direct path to realization" where he talks about contemplating the hindrances.
p. 190Ben wrote:Hi Daniel,
I don;t have my copy with me currently. I do remember Venerable writing about reviewing the hindrances. It could be in the Investigation of Dhammas section. I'm sorry I can't be more specific.
Acoustical symbols and optical symbols ... both are just symbols without inherent meaning. However meaning unfolds upon contact.danieLion wrote:PS: Can a BOOK be a teacher?
The composer John Cage once noted that performed music is an extension of our nervous systems. This could apply to writing too, i.e., books are extensions of author's nervous systems. If so, books are teachers. And so are audio talks. Still, I'd rather have the flesh and blood version when possible.TMingyur wrote:Acoustical symbols and optical symbols ... both are just symbols without inherent meaning. However meaning unfolds upon contact.danieLion wrote:PS: Can a BOOK be a teacher?
Which of course is just an optical symbol.danieLion wrote:Still, I'd rather have the flesh and blood version when possible.
I actually have quite the opposite intention. I think that there are tens of thousands of perfectly competent teachers out there, and that the idea that one needs to go visit some famous Ajahn/Sayadaw to make progress is counterproductive. Andthis idea that "there are only a couple of good teachers" sometimes seems to be used as an excuse not to make use of local resources which, even if not perfect, are infinitely better than nothing.danieLion wrote: 3. I've observed several practitioners use the phrase "my teacher" in a way that suggests they're wearing it like a credential badge or a backstage pass, or as conferring the right to brag on them, which can devolve to: My Ajahn can beat up your Ajahn!
As long as it's squishy I don't care if it's illusory.TMingyur wrote:Which of course is just an optical symbol.danieLion wrote:Still, I'd rather have the flesh and blood version when possible.
mikenz66 wrote:And this idea that "there are only a couple of good teachers" sometimes seems to be used as an excuse not to make use of local resources which, even if not perfect, are infinitely better than nothing.
I sometimes mention that something is what my (various, they come and go) teachers have said when I don't have a good reference, or because it makes for a more interesting conversational tone (I dislike writing in the third person ). And also to emphasise that my no-name teachers tend to mostly agree with the famous ones. As one would expect from competent practitioners...
When a sense impression which has no inherent meaning causes meaning to arise in the wake of contact, vedana, perception and papanca the experience of meaning qua experience I would not call "illusory".danieLion wrote:As long as it's squishy I don't care if it's illusory.TMingyur wrote:Which of course is just an optical symbol.danieLion wrote:Still, I'd rather have the flesh and blood version when possible.
Venerable Acariya Maha Boowa Ñanasampanno, "Feelings of Pain," Straight From theTeachers lend us bits and pieces, which are merely fragments to serve as hints or as leads for us to contemplate so that they'll grow and branch out into our own wealth.
Any Dhamma that's a wealth coming from our own tactics: That's truly our own wealth. We'll never exhaust it. If we can think and probe cunningly in removing defilements until they fall away completely, using the tactics we develop on our own from the ideas our teachers lend us as starting capital, that's our own Dhamma. However much may arise, it's all our own Dhamma. What we derive from the texts is the Buddha's — and we borrow it from him. What we get from our teachers, we borrow from them — except when we are listening to them teach and we understand the Dhamma and cure defilement at that moment: That's our wealth while we are listening. After that, we take their tactics to contemplate until they branch out through our own ingenuity. This is our own wealth, in terms both of the causes — our contemplation — and of the outcome, the satisfactory results we gain step by step all the way to release from suffering and stress — and that's entirely ours. It stays with us, and no one can come to divide up any of our share at all.