Disagreeing with Leigh Brasington

General discussion of issues related to Theravada Meditation, e.g. meditation postures, developing a regular sitting practice, skillfully relating to difficulties and hindrances, etc.
ignobleone
Posts: 150
Joined: Fri Feb 03, 2012 7:15 pm

Re: Disagreeing with Leigh Brasington

Post by ignobleone » Fri Nov 02, 2012 10:20 pm

tiltbillings wrote:Refuting myself? Not at all. The problem lies with your continually less than clear exposition of your position. Daverupa seems to have nailed it:
  • The "way you do" doesn't refer to your methods, but your conclusions about a specific individual. To say those conclusions are the 'right ones' is the problem here, because that assertion has not been supported by your posts. To think that saddha means you get to judge others is horribly mistaken. You can argue a point of doctrine or discipline, but ad hominem is out of place
Okay, now what you mean is clear. I should have shown a concrete example and then relate it to sadha. Remember I said you can know from his website, no mind-reading needed.
Consider these quotes from http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka ... .than.html and notice the bold parts:
SN 22.57 wrote:"And what is feeling? These six bodies of feeling — feeling born of eye-contact, feeling born of ear-contact, feeling born of nose-contact, feeling born of tongue-contact, feeling born of body-contact, feeling born of intellect-contact: this is called feeling. From the origination of contact comes the origination of feeling. From the cessation of contact comes the cessation of feeling. And just this noble eightfold path is the path of practice leading to the cessation of feeling... The fact that pleasure & happiness arises in dependence on feeling: that is the allure of feeling. The fact that feeling is inconstant, stressful, subject to change: that is the drawback of feeling. The subduing of desire & passion for feeling, the abandoning of desire & passion for feeling: that is the escape from feeling...
.
.
.
"For any brahmans or contemplatives who by directly knowing consciousness in this way, directly knowing the origination of consciousness in this way, directly knowing the cessation of consciousness in this way, directly knowing the path of practice leading to the cessation of consciousness in this way, directly knowing the allure of consciousness in this way, directly knowing the drawback of consciousness in this way, directly knowing the escape from consciousness in this way, are practicing for disenchantment — dispassion — cessation with regard to consciousness, they are practicing rightly. Those who are practicing rightly are firmly based in this doctrine & discipline. And any brahmans or contemplatives who by directly knowing consciousness in this way, directly knowing the origination of consciousness in this way, directly knowing the cessation of consciousness in this way, directly knowing the path of practice leading to the cessation of consciousness in this way, directly knowing the allure of consciousness in this way, directly knowing the drawback of consciousness in this way, directly knowing the escape from consciousness in this way, are — from disenchantment, dispassion, cessation, lack of clinging/sustenance with regard to consciousness — released, they are well-released. Those who are well-released are fully accomplished. And with those who are fully accomplished, there is no cycle for the sake of describing them.
And compare with Brasington jhana instruction on his website http://www.leighb.com/jhana3.htm:
LB wrote:The hard part is the do nothing else part. You put your attention on the pleasant sensation, and nothing happens, so you might think to yourself, "He said something was supposed to happen." No, I did not say to make comments about watching the pleasant sensation. Or, you might put your attention on the pleasant sensation and it starts to increase, so you think, "Oh! Oh! Something's happening!" No. Or it comes up just a little bit and then it stops, and you sort of try and help it. No. None of this works.

You are to simply observe the pleasant sensation. You become totally immersed in the pleasantness of the pleasant sensation. And I mean by this just what I say: the pleasantness of the pleasant sensation. I don't mean the location of the pleasant sensation; nor its intensity; nor its duration. I don't mean whether the pleasant sensation is increasing or decreasing or staying the same. Just focus entirely upon the pleasant aspect of the pleasant sensation, and the jhana will arise on its own.
He doesn't practice rightly since he doesn't follow the Buddha's instruction. He also missed some other clues in suttas. It's because he doesn't believe the instruction is quite well preserved (sutta is incomplete), thus he established his own subjective measure.

User avatar
Cittasanto
Posts: 6625
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 10:31 pm
Location: Ellan Vannin
Contact:

Re: Disagreeing with Leigh Brasington

Post by Cittasanto » Fri Nov 02, 2012 10:33 pm

Vipassana - Samatha
Blog, Suttas, Aj Chah, Facebook.

He who knows only his own side of the case knows little of that. His reasons may be good, and no one may have been able to refute them.
But if he is equally unable to refute the reasons on the opposite side, if he does not so much as know what they are, he has no ground for preferring either opinion …
...
He must be able to hear them from persons who actually believe them … he must know them in their most plausible and persuasive form.
John Stuart Mill

User avatar
tiltbillings
Posts: 23044
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2008 9:25 am

Re: Disagreeing with Leigh Brasington

Post by tiltbillings » Sat Nov 03, 2012 2:32 am

ignobleone wrote:He doesn't practice rightly since he doesn't follow the Buddha's instruction. He also missed some other clues in suttas. It's because he doesn't believe the instruction is quite well preserved (sutta is incomplete), thus he established his own subjective measure.
That assumes that you know what the absolute right way to practice is, and it assumes that you are the arbiter of how the practice is to be done and how the suttas must be interpreted, which you have not shown to be the case. It is your opinion that he does not practice rightly, and you are entitled to your opinion, of course, but I find it less than convincing.
>> Do you see a man wise [enlightened/ariya] in his own eyes? There is more hope for a fool than for him.<< -- Proverbs 26:12

This being is bound to samsara, kamma is his means for going beyond. -- SN I, 38.

“Of course it is happening inside your head, Harry, but why on earth should that mean that it is not real?” HPatDH p.723

SamKR
Posts: 995
Joined: Sun Jul 19, 2009 4:33 pm

Re: Disagreeing with Leigh Brasington

Post by SamKR » Sat Nov 03, 2012 2:55 am

ignobleone wrote:He doesn't practice rightly since he doesn't follow the Buddha's instruction. He also missed some other clues in suttas. It's because he doesn't believe the instruction is quite well preserved (sutta is incomplete), thus he established his own subjective measure.
So, to have practiced rightly we should first believe that suttas are well preserved and complete?
ignobleone wrote:He doesn't practice rightly since he doesn't follow the Buddha's instruction. He also missed some other clues in suttas.
We cannot be so sure! Same thing can be said of any teacher or tradition based on our personal perspectives and interpretations of the Buddha's teachings. But I don't think it's productive to give negative comments about the practice of another well-established teacher or tradition.

ignobleone
Posts: 150
Joined: Fri Feb 03, 2012 7:15 pm

Re: Disagreeing with Leigh Brasington

Post by ignobleone » Sat Nov 03, 2012 4:52 am

SamKR wrote:
ignobleone wrote:He doesn't practice rightly since he doesn't follow the Buddha's instruction. He also missed some other clues in suttas. It's because he doesn't believe the instruction is quite well preserved (sutta is incomplete), thus he established his own subjective measure.
So, to have practiced rightly we should first believe that suttas are well preserved and complete?
This question only shows no Buddhist faith. Read this thread from the beginning and you will find the answer. I'm tired to repeat it again and again.
ignobleone wrote:He doesn't practice rightly since he doesn't follow the Buddha's instruction. He also missed some other clues in suttas.
We cannot be so sure! Same thing can be said of any teacher or tradition based on our personal perspectives and interpretations of the Buddha's teachings. But I don't think it's productive to give negative comments about the practice of another well-established teacher or tradition.
The sutta doesn't need more interpretation, it's already clear by itself.

Some westerners have no Buddhist faith, yet they learn Buddhism. No faith, they only have doubts. Some are even very stubborn they doubt the obvious. The Dalai Lama has nailed it, "homeless inside yourself".

User avatar
ground
Posts: 2591
Joined: Wed Nov 25, 2009 6:01 am

Re: Disagreeing with Leigh Brasington

Post by ground » Sat Nov 03, 2012 5:19 am

ignobleone wrote:This question only shows no Buddhist faith.
What was your religion before you converted to Buddhism? :sage:

User avatar
tiltbillings
Posts: 23044
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2008 9:25 am

Re: Disagreeing with Leigh Brasington

Post by tiltbillings » Sat Nov 03, 2012 5:40 am

ignobleone wrote:
SamKR wrote:
ignobleone wrote:He doesn't practice rightly since he doesn't follow the Buddha's instruction. He also missed some other clues in suttas. It's because he doesn't believe the instruction is quite well preserved (sutta is incomplete), thus he established his own subjective measure.
So, to have practiced rightly we should first believe that suttas are well preserved and complete?
This question only shows no Buddhist faith.
That is your opinion, your belief, but you do not know what is in the heart of others.
>> Do you see a man wise [enlightened/ariya] in his own eyes? There is more hope for a fool than for him.<< -- Proverbs 26:12

This being is bound to samsara, kamma is his means for going beyond. -- SN I, 38.

“Of course it is happening inside your head, Harry, but why on earth should that mean that it is not real?” HPatDH p.723

ignobleone
Posts: 150
Joined: Fri Feb 03, 2012 7:15 pm

Re: Disagreeing with Leigh Brasington

Post by ignobleone » Sat Nov 03, 2012 5:48 pm

ground wrote:What was your religion before you converted to Buddhism? :sage:
I've been a Buddhist since I was eleven. Prior to that, as a kid I had no believe system.

User avatar
tiltbillings
Posts: 23044
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2008 9:25 am

Re: Disagreeing with Leigh Brasington

Post by tiltbillings » Sat Nov 03, 2012 9:37 pm

The point has been made and it serves no further purpose to impugn the faith of others. The thread is now locked.
>> Do you see a man wise [enlightened/ariya] in his own eyes? There is more hope for a fool than for him.<< -- Proverbs 26:12

This being is bound to samsara, kamma is his means for going beyond. -- SN I, 38.

“Of course it is happening inside your head, Harry, but why on earth should that mean that it is not real?” HPatDH p.723

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Majestic-12 [Bot] and 30 guests