Is Theravada straightforward?

A discussion on all aspects of Theravāda Buddhism
User avatar
Alex123
Posts: 4035
Joined: Wed Mar 10, 2010 11:32 pm

Re: Is Theravada straightforward?

Post by Alex123 »

daverupa wrote:Is it true that the Dhamma can be productively practiced when it is learned from books, and not in the context of live instruction?
It is true. But the best would be to have Buddha or an Arahant as a live teacher who will set one strait and help avoid dead end paths.


I wish I could teach myself then what I know now. I would have saved so much time and useless effort.
User avatar
Dan74
Posts: 4529
Joined: Sun Mar 01, 2009 11:12 pm
Location: Switzerland

Re: Is Theravada straightforward?

Post by Dan74 »

I wonder if one could teach himself (herself) why do we need the Sangha at all? Why did people like Ajahns Sumedho and Amaro go to Thailand, train for so many years, endured mosquitoes and tropical diseases when they could've just stayed home?

I mean yes, sure, one can make some progress on one's own, but can we really pull ourselves out by the bootstraps? Can a blind person in a dark labyrinth find his way out even with the most accurate map?
_/|\_
daverupa
Posts: 5980
Joined: Mon Jan 31, 2011 6:58 pm

Re: Is Theravada straightforward?

Post by daverupa »

Dan74 wrote:I wonder if one could teach himself (herself) why do we need the Sangha at all?
The monastic sangha, when done properly, offers the most efficacious environment for practice. In addition, there was once no distinction between monastic sangha and the teachings, since the oral tradition meant that the two could not be differentiated.

Writing ultimately changed the second part, but not the first.
  • "And how is it, bhikkhus, that by protecting oneself one protects others? By the pursuit, development, and cultivation of the four establishments of mindfulness. It is in such a way that by protecting oneself one protects others.

    "And how is it, bhikkhus, that by protecting others one protects oneself? By patience, harmlessness, goodwill, and sympathy. It is in such a way that by protecting others one protects oneself.

- Sedaka Sutta [SN 47.19]
User avatar
Alex123
Posts: 4035
Joined: Wed Mar 10, 2010 11:32 pm

Re: Is Theravada straightforward?

Post by Alex123 »

Dan74 wrote:I wonder if one could teach himself (herself) why do we need the Sangha at all? Why did people like Ajahns Sumedho and Amaro go to Thailand, train for so many years, endured mosquitoes and tropical diseases when they could've just stayed home?

I mean yes, sure, one can make some progress on one's own, but can we really pull ourselves out by the bootstraps? Can a blind person in a dark labyrinth find his way out even with the most accurate map?

In the past there were no Dhamma books. Thus you needed ordained sangha who would dedicate their life to to remember and recite the Pali Canon .

Today you don't have to climb mountains and travel far to learn some subtle doctrines.


IMHO.
User avatar
Mr Man
Posts: 4016
Joined: Tue Oct 04, 2011 8:42 am

Re: Is Theravada straightforward?

Post by Mr Man »

mikenz66 wrote:but is realization straightforward?
I'm not sure about actual realization but I think the conceptualization is certainly fairly straightforward and not overly technical.
mikenz66 wrote:The Forest tradition (in it's broad context, not just the Ajahn Chah group) is very diverse
In my opinion it is not really that broad and diverse. The key uniting element was practicing within the vinaya and following a certain style of practice.
User avatar
mikenz66
Posts: 19943
Joined: Sat Jan 10, 2009 7:37 am
Location: Aotearoa, New Zealand

Re: Is Theravada straightforward?

Post by mikenz66 »

Mr Man wrote:
mikenz66 wrote:but is realization straightforward?
I'm not sure about actual realization but I think the conceptualization is certainly fairly straightforward and not overly technical.
But the conceptualization is still just the "finger pointing at the moon", isn't it? And which conceptual map are you referring to, the commentarial progress of insight, or some other map?
Mr Man wrote:
mikenz66 wrote:The Forest tradition (in it's broad context, not just the Ajahn Chah group) is very diverse
In my opinion it is not really that broad and diverse. The key uniting element was practicing within the vinaya and following a certain style of practice.
But which style of practice is that? I see a huge diversity, even in the Western Ajahn Chah students. Ajahn Brahm and some others teach a Visuddhimagga-strength jhana approach. Many others, such as Ajahn Tiradhammo, teach a vipassana-oriented style that is quite compatible with what many Mahasi teachers teach. (On one retreat I did with Ajahn Tiradhammo he mentioned Ven Nyanaponika's book Heart of Buddhist Meditation as a key reference in his early development).

:anjali:
Mike
User avatar
Mr Man
Posts: 4016
Joined: Tue Oct 04, 2011 8:42 am

Re: Is Theravada straightforward?

Post by Mr Man »

As laypeople we could make and keep our practice fairly straight forward, We could base it on the advice to Dhammika http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka ... .irel.html.
I think that possibly we have become rather to materilistic in our practice with the focus of attainments and the like, or intellectual sophistication: 'Look after the pennies and the pounds will look after themselves'
User avatar
mikenz66
Posts: 19943
Joined: Sat Jan 10, 2009 7:37 am
Location: Aotearoa, New Zealand

Re: Is Theravada straightforward?

Post by mikenz66 »

I think that's related to the points raised in this thread. The intellectual sophistication is not the truth.

:anjali:
Mike
User avatar
mikenz66
Posts: 19943
Joined: Sat Jan 10, 2009 7:37 am
Location: Aotearoa, New Zealand

Re: Is Theravada straightforward?

Post by mikenz66 »

Any comments on these statements?
To paraphrase some of Patrick Kearney's points:

Truth is found in a person and a way of life. Truth transforms. If I've found truth, I'll be living in a different way. If this transformation has not happened then I have not connected with this truth.

The Noble Truths are described as things we do.
Realising the Noble Truths has to do with awakening to dukkha ('This Origin of Suffering as a noble truth should be eradicated') and the possibility of a way out ('This Path leading to the cessation of suffering, as a noble truth, should be developed')
:anjali:
Mike
User avatar
Mr Man
Posts: 4016
Joined: Tue Oct 04, 2011 8:42 am

Re: Is Theravada straightforward?

Post by Mr Man »

mikenz66 wrote:
Mr Man wrote:
mikenz66 wrote:but is realization straightforward?
I'm not sure about actual realization but I think the conceptualization is certainly fairly straightforward and not overly technical.
But the conceptualization is still just the "finger pointing at the moon", isn't it? And which conceptual map are you referring to, the commentarial progress of insight, or some other map?
Mr Man wrote:
mikenz66 wrote:The Forest tradition (in it's broad context, not just the Ajahn Chah group) is very diverse
In my opinion it is not really that broad and diverse. The key uniting element was practicing within the vinaya and following a certain style of practice.
But which style of practice is that? I see a huge diversity, even in the Western Ajahn Chah students. Ajahn Brahm and some others teach a Visuddhimagga-strength jhana approach. Many others, such as Ajahn Tiradhammo, teach a vipassana-oriented style that is quite compatible with what many Mahasi teachers teach. (On one retreat I did with Ajahn Tiradhammo he mentioned Ven Nyanaponika's book Heart of Buddhist Meditation as a key reference in his early development).
Hi Mike, I wasn't referring to a particular conceptual map and I was thinking more of the Thai forest tradition as it was. The style of practice was keeping vinaya, pindapat, sweeping paths, dying robes, chanting, tudong, perseverance, kammaṭṭhāna
Post Reply