Virtue for nibbana

Buddhist ethical conduct including the Five Precepts (Pañcasikkhāpada), and Eightfold Ethical Conduct (Aṭṭhasīla).
Saengnapha
Posts: 1350
Joined: Wed Sep 13, 2017 10:17 am

Re: Virtue for nibbana

Post by Saengnapha » Mon Dec 18, 2017 5:02 pm

binocular wrote:
Sun Dec 17, 2017 3:04 pm
Saengnapha wrote:
Sun Dec 17, 2017 2:14 pm
So, one is climbing the ladder? One is going from point A to point B? One is divided into subject and object? If nibbana is indeed beyond the sphere of all that is mentioned, no one is going to reach that place because the vehicle of 'travel' cannot go there, it is part of the dream of existence. Stopping all this 'becoming' and attachment to experience is the only possibility and which is why it is so bloody rare for someone to give up their attachment to existence and all the states of mind that keep the continuity of the personal going. Who is ready to die for this?
Looks like you're committing the pre/trans fallacy:
Pre/trans fallacy[edit]
Wilber believes that many claims about non-rational states make a mistake he calls the pre/trans fallacy. According to Wilber, the non-rational stages of consciousness (what Wilber calls "pre-rational" and "trans-rational" stages) can be easily confused with one another. In Wilber's view, one can reduce trans-rational spiritual realization to pre-rational regression, or one can elevate pre-rational states to the trans-rational domain.[20] For example, Wilber claims that Freud and Jung commit this fallacy. Freud considered mystical realization to be a regression to infantile oceanic states. Wilber alleges that Freud thus commits a fallacy of reduction. Wilber thinks that Jung commits the converse form of the same mistake by considering pre-rational myths to reflect divine realizations. Likewise, pre-rational states may be misidentified as post-rational states.[21]
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ken_Wilbe ... ns_fallacy
The pre/trans fallacy essentially says that more primitive things always share something in common with more advanced things, and they are apt to be confused.

To give a simple example, let’s say I’m driving to the village of Bundanoon. Before I get to Bundanoon, I see fields, cows, a train line. At Bundanoon, I see a village. After I’ve passed through the village, I also see field, cows, and a train line. Of course, they’re not the same as the ones I saw before, but they are somewhat similar.

The point here is that if someone is still in Bundanoon, and has not passed through to the other side, it’s impossible for them to know what is there. If someone says, “It’s fields, cows, and a train line”, they will naturally assume that it is identical to what came before. That is, someone in the middle state will normally make the mistake of collapsing the pre and the trans state. Only someone who has gone through to the other side can clearly know the difference.

But there is more. The one who has gone through to the other side stands at a higher plane of understanding. They not only know the pre, middle, and trans states: they understand why it is that the person in the middle thinks the way they do. They know this, because they used to be that person. They used to stand in exactly that spot and think exactly those thoughts.

And here is where the problem of arrogance arises. A person standing in Bundanoon might talk with someone who has been to the other side and say, “It sounds just like what came before.” “But no,” says the other, “it may sound the same, but actually it’s quite different; I know, I’ve been there.”

What to do with this? An arrogant person would simply dismiss the testimony of the other, assuming their own perspective to be the highest. A gullible person would blithely accept anything they’re told. But a rational person would inquire, ask as to details. They’d see whether the testimony held good, and check the person’s reliability. If it all checked out, they’d accept the claim provisionally, while still reserving final judgment: “Hopefully one day I’ll go there myself, and then I’ll know for sure.”

https://discourse.suttacentral.net/t/wh ... -true/6399
Since when has Wilber become the authority on such matters? I knew him in the 80's. He was a student of Da Free John, one of the great posers. He was always comparing this to that, trying to make everything fit into his mold.

Saengnapha
Posts: 1350
Joined: Wed Sep 13, 2017 10:17 am

Re: Virtue for nibbana

Post by Saengnapha » Mon Dec 18, 2017 5:08 pm

Nicolas wrote:
Sun Dec 17, 2017 3:12 pm
Saengnapha wrote:
Sat Dec 16, 2017 3:47 am
paul wrote:
Fri Dec 15, 2017 11:03 pm
This explains how all fabrication ceases at the point of entry, including the action of right effort, so the conditioned path leads to the unconditioned.
It really doesn't explain 'how' the fabrication ceases. And, can we really say that the conditioned leads to the unconditioned? If you concluded that the conditioned, which includes effort, ceased, along with all its fabrications, perhaps the unconditioned would be present. But the unconditioned is not produced from the conditioned.
The below might be helpful:
On the Path, by Ṭhānissaro Bhikkhu wrote: However, the fact that the path is fabricated, while its goal is not, presents a paradox: How can a fabricated path lead to something not fabricated? The solution to this paradox lies in the Buddha’s analysis of the causal principle underlying fabrication, a point that will be covered in more detail in Chapter 3, on right view. Here we can simply note that the basic pattern of that causal principle is such that it creates a complex, non-linear system, and one of the features of such a system is that the factors that maintain it can be pushed in a direction where they cause the system to collapse. In the same way, the processes of fabrication can be pushed in a direction, through the factors of the path, to a point where they bring the system of fabricated experience to collapse, leaving an opening to the unfabricated. This is why the Buddha says that the path is a type of action that leads to the end of action—it’s a fabricated path to the unfabricated.

In practical terms, this means that the factors of the path—because they are fabricated—have to be developed to a certain point, after which they’re abandoned along with all other fabrications. This is one of the reasons why it’s so important not to confuse the path with the goal. They are two radically different things. Some aspects of the path—such as desire, conceit, and the need to fabricate a healthy sense of self to engage in right effort—will be totally abandoned on awakening. Others, which harmonize with awakening, will be abandoned at the moment of awakening but afterwards will still be available for use. The texts describe, for instance, how the awakened are virtuous, even though they are not defined by their virtue, and how even the completely awakened use the contemplations of right view and the practice of right mindfulness and right concentration as pleasant abidings.

Still, one of the features of each factor of the path is that it allows for its own transcendence. In the case of right view, part of this potential for self-transcendence lies in its self-referential quality, which we have already noted: It describes action, and it itself is an action, so it can be used to describe itself—when, as a strategy, it is skillful and should be developed, and when it gets in the way of a higher skill and so should be dropped. This is how it provides a perspective on itself that allows for its transcendence. When trained by the other factors of the path, it can then be turned around and applied to them to provide for their transcendence as well.

The Canon uses many metaphors to describe this self-transcending aspect of the path, such as the relay chariots that are abandoned on reaching their goal, and the raft that is abandoned on reaching the other shore of the river. In fact, the metaphor of the path itself makes this point, although the clearest explanation of this aspect of the metaphor didn’t appear until the Milinda Pañhā, a later text in the Buddhist tradition: Just as a path to a mountain doesn’t cause the mountain but can still lead to the mountain, the noble eightfold path doesn’t cause unbinding, but the act of following it can lead to a direct realization of the freedom of unbinding.

And although the fact is not obvious on the surface, the third main point about the path presented in the Buddha’s first discourse—that it’s a middle way—also implies that the path employs fabricated means that are abandoned on arriving at the goal. This implied fact becomes apparent, though, when we look at what “middle way” means.
Thanks for the quotes. I still stand with what I said. I am not trying to say the path is not useful. It is very useful up to a certain point. Then you are truly left alone and no one can help you sort it. This is not in contradiction to what the Buddha said.

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

Re: Virtue for nibbana

Post by binocular » Tue Dec 19, 2017 8:47 am

Saengnapha wrote:
Mon Dec 18, 2017 5:02 pm
Since when has Wilber become the authority on such matters? I knew him in the 80's. He was a student of Da Free John, one of the great posers. He was always comparing this to that, trying to make everything fit into his mold.
I wasn't posting Wilber's idea in the conviction that people should believe it because it's Wilber who said it. Eh. I simply credited him, and Ven. Sujato, since the passages I quoted were from them.

Saengnapha wrote:
Mon Dec 18, 2017 5:08 pm
Thanks for the quotes. I still stand with what I said. I am not trying to say the path is not useful. It is very useful up to a certain point. Then you are truly left alone and no one can help you sort it. This is not in contradiction to what the Buddha said.
But you seem to think that once a person traverses that path to that point you mention, they will be helpless -- perhaps even as helpless as they are now.
And that is assuming a lot about the future!

It's like saying that once one gets one's driver's licence, one will be or probably will be as helpless about how to drive a car as one was before one entered driving school.

The expectation in the practice is to "see the Dhamma, attain the Dhamma, understand the Dhamma, fathom the Dhamma, cross over doubt, get rid of bewilderment, attain self-confidence, and become independent of others in the teaching of the Teacher."

Saengnapha
Posts: 1350
Joined: Wed Sep 13, 2017 10:17 am

Re: Virtue for nibbana

Post by Saengnapha » Tue Dec 19, 2017 5:34 pm

binocular wrote:
Tue Dec 19, 2017 8:47 am
Saengnapha wrote:
Mon Dec 18, 2017 5:02 pm
Since when has Wilber become the authority on such matters? I knew him in the 80's. He was a student of Da Free John, one of the great posers. He was always comparing this to that, trying to make everything fit into his mold.
I wasn't posting Wilber's idea in the conviction that people should believe it because it's Wilber who said it. Eh. I simply credited him, and Ven. Sujato, since the passages I quoted were from them.

Saengnapha wrote:
Mon Dec 18, 2017 5:08 pm
Thanks for the quotes. I still stand with what I said. I am not trying to say the path is not useful. It is very useful up to a certain point. Then you are truly left alone and no one can help you sort it. This is not in contradiction to what the Buddha said.
But you seem to think that once a person traverses that path to that point you mention, they will be helpless -- perhaps even as helpless as they are now.
And that is assuming a lot about the future!

It's like saying that once one gets one's driver's licence, one will be or probably will be as helpless about how to drive a car as one was before one entered driving school.

The expectation in the practice is to "see the Dhamma, attain the Dhamma, understand the Dhamma, fathom the Dhamma, cross over doubt, get rid of bewilderment, attain self-confidence, and become independent of others in the teaching of the Teacher."
I don't really see how you jump to this conclusion about what I've said. If you've traversed the path up to the point I mention, you should already be experiencing a healthy dose of dispassion and familiarity with states of mind. The focus becomes the inner creation of the 5 Khāndhās and how you perceive. This seems to be the frontier that no one can help you with unbinding this. Leading the horse to water is one thing, making it drink is quite another. This has nothing to do with the future. This is what I'm criticizing. Time is only in your thinking. Your present experience is all there is.

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

Re: Virtue for nibbana

Post by binocular » Tue Dec 19, 2017 5:46 pm

Saengnapha wrote:
Tue Dec 19, 2017 5:34 pm
I don't really see how you jump to this conclusion about what I've said. If you've traversed the path up to the point I mention, you should already be experiencing a healthy dose of dispassion and familiarity with states of mind. The focus becomes the inner creation of the 5 Khāndhās and how you perceive. This seems to be the frontier that no one can help you with unbinding this. Leading the horse to water is one thing, making it drink is quite another. This has nothing to do with the future. This is what I'm criticizing. Time is only in your thinking. Your present experience is all there is.
Are you "already experiencing a healthy dose of dispassion and familiarity with states of mind"?

Saengnapha
Posts: 1350
Joined: Wed Sep 13, 2017 10:17 am

Re: Virtue for nibbana

Post by Saengnapha » Tue Dec 19, 2017 5:51 pm

binocular wrote:
Tue Dec 19, 2017 5:46 pm
Saengnapha wrote:
Tue Dec 19, 2017 5:34 pm
I don't really see how you jump to this conclusion about what I've said. If you've traversed the path up to the point I mention, you should already be experiencing a healthy dose of dispassion and familiarity with states of mind. The focus becomes the inner creation of the 5 Khāndhās and how you perceive. This seems to be the frontier that no one can help you with unbinding this. Leading the horse to water is one thing, making it drink is quite another. This has nothing to do with the future. This is what I'm criticizing. Time is only in your thinking. Your present experience is all there is.
Are you "already experiencing a healthy dose of dispassion and familiarity with states of mind"?
It is a question that you need to ask yourself, not me.

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

Re: Virtue for nibbana

Post by binocular » Tue Dec 19, 2017 5:59 pm

Saengnapha wrote:
Tue Dec 19, 2017 5:51 pm
binocular wrote:
Tue Dec 19, 2017 5:46 pm
Are you "already experiencing a healthy dose of dispassion and familiarity with states of mind"?
It is a question that you need to ask yourself, not me.
If you aren't "already experiencing a healthy dose of dispassion and familiarity with states of mind", then how can you know what it will be like when you do?

befriend
Posts: 1255
Joined: Thu Jun 09, 2011 11:39 am

Re: Virtue for nibbana

Post by befriend » Tue Dec 19, 2017 9:40 pm

:focus:
Take care of mindfulness and mindfulness will take care of you.

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: robertk and 13 guests