Where is the line between Buddhism and Dhamma?

A discussion on all aspects of Theravāda Buddhism
User avatar
SDC
Posts: 4853
Joined: Mon Dec 14, 2009 11:08 pm

Re: Re:

Post by SDC » Tue Jun 18, 2019 6:26 pm

binocular wrote:
Tue Jun 18, 2019 3:35 pm
But there is no shortage of Buddhists who claim to have proof of Dhamma long before they have attained stream entry, who severely criticize others for being "of little faith". That's one of those situations where Buddhist apologists clash with Buddhist doctrine.
Criticism is implicit in whatever is said by those who claim to have proof. Yet they never provide any traceable evidence for their claims. If you are going to roar the lion's roar, you best say something worthwhile that resonates with the majority of your audience. If all you can muster is the proverbial finger wagging on the keyboard, you did nothing but screech like a kitten.

One may not be able to confirm access to Dhamma prior to nobility, but there is access to energy (viriya) and trajectory prior to any sort of confirmation. Yes, some of that is faith-based, but even the mere knowledge of being able to both position attention and compose the mind to varying degrees, along with the prospect for even further composure and trajectory, is directionality towards "something" - something other than how things are "now" and how the used to be prior to any effort to understand. That much you can know. That isn't proof, but if you look at something like the satta bojjhaṅgā (factors of awakening), you can built trust in the progression when your experience - more and more - looks to be corresponding with the meaning that you've heard described in suttas or some other source.

Dan74
Posts: 3039
Joined: Sun Mar 01, 2009 11:12 pm

Re: Where is the line between Buddhism and Dhamma?

Post by Dan74 » Wed Jun 19, 2019 5:58 am

binocular wrote:
Mon Jun 17, 2019 11:03 am
Dan74 wrote:
Sat Jun 15, 2019 5:26 pm
Is that what it takes? What is really there to take or not take for granted?
binocular wrote:
Sat Jun 15, 2019 3:57 pm
Taking for granted that one is in the right religion, the right lineage, the right group.
Bowing, kneeling, chanting, prostrating -- none of that is going to make some particular religious choice the right religious choice. If it would, cults would be full of happy, perfectly functional, and most of all, enlightened people.
I was speaking of physically participating at a communal Dhamma event as an aspect of practice, not the totality of it.
binocular wrote:
Mon Jun 17, 2019 11:03 am
Like much of the flow of life, playing with children or a walk in the forest, prostrating in the temple hall or offering Dana, the experience of it, the participation, the communion, do not need to be burdened by self-conscious awareness or a critical observer keeping a respectful distance, do they?
Self-conscious awareness is not a burden, other than perhaps to those who are trying something to hide, esp. from themselves.
To the extent that you hold on to self-conscious awareness, you are not immersing in the experience. There's time to reflect and time to just be.
binocular wrote:
Mon Jun 17, 2019 11:03 am
I mean I am not advocating delighting in a Nuremberg rally here. Or am I bringing everything down to the superficial again?
You're missing some important points.
Such as the difference between cultist submission and what could be termed "healthy spirituality".
Then you're not accounting for the different modes of practice that people take up, depending on their particular circumstances. For example, someone who has relatively easy access to a Buddhist community will develop a different mode of practice in contrast to someone who has no such access and is left mostly to themselves.

To say that both are supposed to live up to the same devotional standard, with the same external expression and the same motivation is ... well, I don't know what exactly it is, other than that it is characteristic for religious group mentality.
"To say that both are supposed to live up to the same devotional standard" - is that how you read me? I mentioned an aspect of practice that is rarely spoken of here. Is devotional practice cultist submission? I can hardly relate this response to what I tried to say. Of course people's circumstances differ and people do practice differently. It's not for me to judge. I just share a little of what I've seen/done.
_/|\_

binocular
Posts: 6328
Joined: Sat Jan 17, 2009 11:13 pm

Re: Where is the line between Buddhism and Dhamma?

Post by binocular » Wed Jun 19, 2019 4:11 pm

Dan74 wrote:
Wed Jun 19, 2019 5:58 am
It's not for me to judge.
:popcorn:
Every person we save is one less zombie to fight. -- World War Z

binocular
Posts: 6328
Joined: Sat Jan 17, 2009 11:13 pm

Re: Where is the line between Buddhism and Dhamma?

Post by binocular » Thu Jun 20, 2019 2:32 pm

SDC wrote:
Tue Jun 18, 2019 6:26 pm
One may not be able to confirm access to Dhamma prior to nobility, but there is access to energy (viriya) and trajectory prior to any sort of confirmation. Yes, some of that is faith-based, but even the mere knowledge of being able to both position attention and compose the mind to varying degrees, along with the prospect for even further composure and trajectory, is directionality towards "something" - something other than how things are "now" and how the used to be prior to any effort to understand. That much you can know. That isn't proof, but if you look at something like the satta bojjhaṅgā (factors of awakening), you can built trust in the progression when your experience - more and more - looks to be corresponding with the meaning that you've heard described in suttas or some other source.
Like in that simile of the man looking for a big bull elephant, where the man gets different tentative confirmations that he is on the right track (when he sees the markings on trees and the footprints), but refrains from concluding that he has found a big bull elephant until he actually sees him.

SDC wrote:
Tue Jun 18, 2019 6:26 pm
One may not be able to confirm access to Dhamma prior to nobility, but there is access to energy (viriya) /.../
Now here's a topic that rarely gets discussed in these corners!
Every person we save is one less zombie to fight. -- World War Z

binocular
Posts: 6328
Joined: Sat Jan 17, 2009 11:13 pm

Re: Where is the line between Buddhism and Dhamma?

Post by binocular » Thu Jun 20, 2019 2:45 pm

Sam Vara wrote:
Tue Jun 18, 2019 4:22 pm
What do they mean when they say they have "proof of Dhamma"?
I don't know. They're not open to discussion. They don't actually discuss things with lowly people such as myself, they only judge.
They might just mean they have proof that it is right for them, or that practising works. Could you cite a couple of real examples so we are better able to see what they mean?
So you can defend them, again? We've been down this road before, it didn't end well.

As far as definitions go, nobody can have proof of Dhamma until stream entry, end of story. As such, if a person who hasn't attained stream entry criticizes those "of little faith", this criticism is invalid.
Every person we save is one less zombie to fight. -- World War Z

User avatar
Sam Vara
Posts: 5359
Joined: Sun Jun 05, 2011 5:42 pm
Location: Sussex, U.K.

Re: Where is the line between Buddhism and Dhamma?

Post by Sam Vara » Thu Jun 20, 2019 3:21 pm

binocular wrote:
Thu Jun 20, 2019 2:45 pm
Sam Vara wrote:
Tue Jun 18, 2019 4:22 pm
What do they mean when they say they have "proof of Dhamma"?
I don't know. They're not open to discussion. They don't actually discuss things with lowly people such as myself, they only judge.
They might just mean they have proof that it is right for them, or that practising works. Could you cite a couple of real examples so we are better able to see what they mean?
So you can defend them, again? We've been down this road before, it didn't end well.

As far as definitions go, nobody can have proof of Dhamma until stream entry, end of story. As such, if a person who hasn't attained stream entry criticizes those "of little faith", this criticism is invalid.


Given our lack of real examples, the indeterminacy of the concept, and the taciturnity of those concerned, it's all a bit speculative.

binocular
Posts: 6328
Joined: Sat Jan 17, 2009 11:13 pm

Re: Where is the line between Buddhism and Dhamma?

Post by binocular » Thu Jun 20, 2019 3:26 pm

Sam Vara wrote:
Thu Jun 20, 2019 3:21 pm
Given our lack of real examples, the indeterminacy of the concept, and the taciturnity of those concerned, it's all a bit speculative.
I would be breaching the ToS if I were to give the most poignant examples that I can think of.
Secondly, you, of all people, know very well what I'm talking about.

Now, if you have something to say on the line between Buddhism and Dhamma, you're welcome to do so.
Every person we save is one less zombie to fight. -- World War Z

User avatar
Sam Vara
Posts: 5359
Joined: Sun Jun 05, 2011 5:42 pm
Location: Sussex, U.K.

Re: Where is the line between Buddhism and Dhamma?

Post by Sam Vara » Thu Jun 20, 2019 3:36 pm

binocular wrote:
Thu Jun 20, 2019 3:26 pm
Sam Vara wrote:
Thu Jun 20, 2019 3:21 pm
Given our lack of real examples, the indeterminacy of the concept, and the taciturnity of those concerned, it's all a bit speculative.
I would be breaching the ToS if I were to give the most poignant examples that I can think of.
Secondly, you, of all people, know very well what I'm talking about.

Now, if you have something to say on the line between Buddhism and Dhamma, you're welcome to do so.
I've commented on the Buddhism/Dhamma distinction early on page 1, thanks. I was here commenting on your claim that there is a group of mysterious Buddhists who are doing something mysteriously wrong.

User avatar
SDC
Posts: 4853
Joined: Mon Dec 14, 2009 11:08 pm

Re: Where is the line between Buddhism and Dhamma?

Post by SDC » Thu Jun 20, 2019 5:08 pm

binocular wrote:
Thu Jun 20, 2019 2:45 pm
...
Sam Vara wrote:
Thu Jun 20, 2019 3:36 pm
I was here commenting on your claim that there is a group of mysterious Buddhists who are doing something mysteriously wrong.
Less so now, but there was a time on this forum (and E-Sangha before it) when a portion of the “old guard” would perch from their pedestals. Fortunately it seems as though the criteria for what is worthy of respect and veneration has become more realistic, and far more is required from someone if they are to gain and maintain the respect of their peers. Simply tossing your resume in the faces of others just doesn’t cut it anymore. That is a standard I hope we never lose.

The finger wagers are still there though, yet they have adjusted their stylings. Nevertheless, I think it is inappropriate to emphasize such people in way that paints them as arbiters of that line between Buddhism and the Dhamma. The practitioner’s effort, not permission from a guru, is what will bring about the shift of attention from one to the other.

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Baidu [Spider], confusedlayman, Majestic-12 [Bot] and 131 guests