mettā in commentarial tradition (refutation)

General discussion of issues related to Theravada Meditation, e.g. meditation postures, developing a regular sitting practice, skillfully relating to difficulties and hindrances, etc.
User avatar
Dhammarakkhito
Posts: 1115
Joined: Tue Jun 27, 2017 7:31 am
Contact:

Re: mettā in commentarial tradition (refutation)

Post by Dhammarakkhito » Mon Apr 02, 2018 6:35 am

in the course of this discussion i 'fell off the wagon' on to cigarettes and overeating and lost track of whatever arguments i made and what i really wanted out of it
but i dont really believe there is a major conflict here, letting yourself be carved up bandits with a mind free of hate is dying for another. and it is giving up one's life to cultivate mettā; see how the two interpretations are complementary. the particulars were interesting but they sidetracked us. we should agree there would be no mettā involved in taking someone's life in order to stay alive to cultivate mettā. in a roundabout way, i think my original point has been thoroughly proven.
craving for existence is an ultimate barrier to deliverance of the heart and for that reason it should be abandoned.

"Well then, Punna. Now that I have instructed you with a brief instruction, in which country are you going to live?"

"Lord, there is a country called Sunaparanta. I am going to live there."

"Punna, the Sunaparanta people are fierce. They are rough. If they insult and ridicule you, what will you think?"

"If they insult and ridicule me, I will think, 'These Sunaparanta people are civilized, very civilized, in that they don't hit me with their hands.' That is what I will think, O Blessed One. That is what I will think, O One Well-gone."

"But if they hit you with their hands, what will you think?"

"...I will think, 'These Sunaparanta people are civilized, very civilized, in that they don't hit me with a clod.'..."

"But if they hit you with a clod...?"

"...I will think, 'These Sunaparanta people are civilized, very civilized, in that they don't hit me with a stick.'..."

"But if they hit you with a stick...?"

"...I will think, 'These Sunaparanta people are civilized, very civilized, in that they don't hit me with a knife.'..."

"But if they hit you with a knife...?"

"...I will think, 'These Sunaparanta people are civilized, very civilized, in that they don't take my life with a sharp knife.'..."

"But if they take your life with a sharp knife...?"

"If they take my life with a sharp knife, I will think, 'There are disciples of the Blessed One who — horrified, humiliated, and disgusted by the body and by life — have sought for an assassin, but here I have met my assassin without searching for him.' That is what I will think, O Blessed One. That is what I will think, O One Well-gone."

"Good, Punna, very good....

https://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitak ... .than.html
"Just as the ocean has a single taste — that of salt — in the same way, this Dhamma-Vinaya has a single taste: that of release."
— Ud 5.5

https://www.facebook.com/noblebuddhadha ... 34/?type=3

http://seeingthroughthenet.net/
https://sites.google.com/site/santipada ... allytaught

User avatar
DooDoot
Posts: 2520
Joined: Tue Aug 08, 2017 11:06 pm

Re: mettā in commentarial tradition (refutation)

Post by DooDoot » Mon Apr 02, 2018 9:31 am

Dhammarakkhito wrote:
Mon Apr 02, 2018 6:35 am
in the course of this discussion i 'fell off the wagon' on to cigarettes and overeating and lost track of whatever arguments i made and what i really wanted out of it
Metta for oneself; wishing to avoid trouble for oneself; helps give up cigarettes and overeating. I have lost 5 kg in two months by having metta towards this life & wanting to avoid unnecessary hardship & financial cost.
Dhammarakkhito wrote:
Mon Apr 02, 2018 6:35 am
but i dont really believe there is a major conflict here, letting yourself be carved up bandits with a mind free of hate is dying for another.
The bhikkhus with psychic powers, such as Moggallana, used their psychic powers to avoid murderers; so those would-be-murderers would not do bad kamma.
Dhammarakkhito wrote:
Mon Apr 02, 2018 6:35 am
we should agree there would be no mettā involved in taking someone's life in order to stay alive to cultivate mettā. in a roundabout way, i think my original point has been thoroughly proven. craving for existence is an ultimate barrier to deliverance of the heart and for that reason it should be abandoned.
The Buddhist path is gradual. For example, craving for unhealthy sensual pleasures (such as cigarettes & junk food) is to be abandoned before giving up the will to live.
Dhammarakkhito wrote:
Mon Apr 02, 2018 6:35 am
"If they take my life with a sharp knife, I will think, 'There are disciples of the Blessed One who — horrified, humiliated, and disgusted by the body and by life — have sought for an assassin, but here I have met my assassin without searching for him.' That is what I will think, O Blessed One. That is what I will think, O One Well-gone."
Punna here was a Dhamma missionary due to compassion however was also prepared for the worst. The Dhamma path begins as "life-affirming" rather than "life-negating".

User avatar
mikenz66
Posts: 16426
Joined: Sat Jan 10, 2009 7:37 am
Location: Aotearoa, New Zealand

Re: mettā in commentarial tradition (refutation)

Post by mikenz66 » Mon Apr 02, 2018 9:42 am

Dhammarakkhito wrote:
Mon Apr 02, 2018 6:35 am
letting yourself be carved up bandits with a mind free of hate is dying for another.
I don't see where it says to "let yourself be carved up by bandits".
Even if low-down bandits were to sever you limb from limb, anyone who had a malevolent thought on that account would not be following my instructions. ...

https://suttacentral.net/mn21/en/sujato#sc23
:heart:
Mike

binocular
Posts: 5468
Joined: Sat Jan 17, 2009 11:13 pm

Re: mettā in commentarial tradition (refutation)

Post by binocular » Mon Apr 02, 2018 11:26 am

Dhammarakkhito wrote:
Mon Apr 02, 2018 6:35 am
letting yourself be carved up bandits with a mind free of hate is dying for another.
No, it's not. That's a bizarre idea you have there. If someone tortures you, but you don't feel hatred for them, that doesn't mean that you're dying for them.
And what about that "letting yourself be carved up by bandits"? When one is overpowered, there is no issue of "letting oneself".

User avatar
Dhammarakkhito
Posts: 1115
Joined: Tue Jun 27, 2017 7:31 am
Contact:

Re: mettā in commentarial tradition (refutation)

Post by Dhammarakkhito » Tue Apr 03, 2018 2:29 am

doodoot, there is something to what you're saying, i have had thoughts of self-mortification, that is not all tho. i dont smoke cigarettes purposely to harm myself. it's due to unwise attention (ayoniso manasikara)
wouldn't want to beat a dead horse, figuratively; there is kind of a binary logic i see maybe employed, what i'm professing transcends self-love and self-hate. certainly the drawbacks of sensual pleasures are one contemplation. another duality i'd like to transcend is craving for existence and craving for non-existence. interestingly, mahāmoggallāna's murder is not referenced in any of the suttas. i'm not saying it's fake just wish there were more evidence. anyway, i dont mean purposely seek out an assassin, and that story of ven moggallana is plausible
what i mean is where there is a choice of hate-and-live and love-and-die, the latter is 100% preferable. perhaps the most critical point presented in this thread is that in sedaka sutta one protects (oneself by protecting) others with universal love. in that way, one dies for others out of love *and* dies to protect the cultivation of love -- have i made this clearer :heart:
"Just as the ocean has a single taste — that of salt — in the same way, this Dhamma-Vinaya has a single taste: that of release."
— Ud 5.5

https://www.facebook.com/noblebuddhadha ... 34/?type=3

http://seeingthroughthenet.net/
https://sites.google.com/site/santipada ... allytaught

binocular
Posts: 5468
Joined: Sat Jan 17, 2009 11:13 pm

Re: mettā in commentarial tradition (refutation)

Post by binocular » Tue Apr 03, 2018 3:37 am

Dhammarakkhito wrote:
Tue Apr 03, 2018 2:29 am
what i mean is where there is a choice of hate-and-live and love-and-die
There is no such choice. Except maybe in romantic films.

User avatar
Dhammarakkhito
Posts: 1115
Joined: Tue Jun 27, 2017 7:31 am
Contact:

Re: mettā in commentarial tradition (refutation)

Post by Dhammarakkhito » Tue Apr 03, 2018 3:45 am

maybe then we could stop referring to gun ownership as self defense
"Just as the ocean has a single taste — that of salt — in the same way, this Dhamma-Vinaya has a single taste: that of release."
— Ud 5.5

https://www.facebook.com/noblebuddhadha ... 34/?type=3

http://seeingthroughthenet.net/
https://sites.google.com/site/santipada ... allytaught

binocular
Posts: 5468
Joined: Sat Jan 17, 2009 11:13 pm

Re: mettā in commentarial tradition (refutation)

Post by binocular » Tue Apr 03, 2018 3:54 am

Having a gun does not equal successful self-defense.

But more generally, whether one will remain alive and for how long is ultimately not in one's control. This is why there is no choice like "hate-and-live and love-and-die".

User avatar
DooDoot
Posts: 2520
Joined: Tue Aug 08, 2017 11:06 pm

Re: mettā in commentarial tradition (refutation)

Post by DooDoot » Tue Apr 03, 2018 4:41 am

Dhammarakkhito wrote:
Tue Apr 03, 2018 2:29 am
what i'm professing transcends self-love and self-hate.
Professing is not the same as practising. MN 6 says Dhamma can't be reached unless the precepts are maintained. Maintaining precepts when inwardly challenged by strong conditioned urges & agitation does not require abandoning 'self' because the reflection (yoniso manasikara, such as in MN 61 or MN 19) that maintains precepts is related to 'harming & non-harming' rather than anatta . Personally, I disagree with monks, such as Yuttadhammo, that teach meditation for the overcoming of moral problems. I think the mind that lacks moral 'self-control' will equally be unable to abandon 'self'.

With metta :heart:

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 29 guests