Niganthas Vs Modern day idealogy

Exploring Theravāda's connections to other paths. What can we learn from other traditions, religions and philosophies?
Brizzy

Re: Niganthas Vs Modern day idealogy

Post by Brizzy » Wed Mar 24, 2010 2:12 pm

BlackBird wrote:
Brizzy wrote: I would not want to do peoples thinking for them. I am not being impolite. If you want to answer my question - great, if not -great.
Do you not think it would have been more straightforward to say:

"I think Goenka's method shows similarities with Jain-Dhamma, this is my explanation for it, and here is the evidence."

Instead you start off with a loaded question, which relies on the fore drawn conclusion that Jain-Dhamma and Goenka method are identical. You posts links to a couple of sources, without once mentioning the name of the teacher/method, and ask if we can find any difference at all between them. This is tantamount to saying: "I know the truth, prove me wrong."

If you want people to have a reasoned discussion with you, then show them the courtesy they deserve.

metta
Jack
I dont think it was a loaded question. I asked if there was any difference. If after reading the two links people thought there was'nt, then they could say so. If people thought there was a difference then they could say so. I personally dont think there is much difference, and the Thanissaro link sums up my argument quite well, reinforced by goenkas on "take" on how kamma works. You seem very defensive or hurt "show them the courtesy they deserve." If you feel I have been rude, then I apologise.
"I know the truth, prove me wrong."

I dont think that in the same posting that you accuse me of not being courteous, you then go on to try & put words in my mouth, that were not said, is a bit disingenuous.

:smile:

Brizzy

Re: Niganthas Vs Modern day idealogy

Post by Brizzy » Wed Mar 24, 2010 2:31 pm

David N. Snyder wrote:Goenka's answer and teaching seems very much inline with this from the Buddha:
"And how is striving fruitful, how is exertion fruitful? There is the case where a monk, when not loaded down, does not load himself down with pain, nor does he reject pleasure that accords with the Dhamma, although he is not fixated on that pleasure. He discerns that 'When I exert a [physical, verbal, or mental] fabrication against this cause of stress, then from the fabrication of exertion there is dispassion. When I look on with equanimity at that cause of stress, then from the development of equanimity there is dispassion.' So he exerts a fabrication against the cause of stress where there comes dispassion from the fabrication of exertion, and develops equanimity with regard to the cause of stress where there comes dispassion from the development of equanimity. Thus the stress where there comes dispassion from the fabrication of exertion is exhausted & the stress where there comes dispassion from the development of equanimity is exhausted."
MN 101
Goenka talks about past actions rising to the surface. His concentration technique is aimed specifically to induce sensations, rather than tranquility. These sensations are to be viewed as past kammas (sankharas) to be looked upon with equanimity.(thereby eradicating kammas & not producing further kammas). This does not seem to me, quite what the Buddha is saying - it is the desire & lust that are to abandoned, past kammas are not eradicated. There is a sutta where the buddha talks of metta, being an escape from bad kamma, but even here, old kamma is not eradicated - it is simply overwhelmed by metta. I will endeavour to find the particular sutta.

:smile:

User avatar
Alex123
Posts: 3476
Joined: Wed Mar 10, 2010 11:32 pm

Re: Niganthas Vs Modern day idealogy

Post by Alex123 » Wed Mar 24, 2010 5:04 pm

Brizzy wrote:
Hi Retro

"Is there any difference between Nigantha/Jain idealogy and a modern day "View", by a well known teacher? I started with this question. :thinking:

Eliminating entire complexes of sankharas(kamma) sounds a lot like the jain practice to me.

:smile:
Maybe Goenka doesn't talk about eliminating one sankhara at a time.

And neither does lets say Patisambhidamagga Chapter XXIII Abhisamayo

One does not abandon past defilements, one does not abandon future defilements, one does not abandon present defilements. If one does not abandon past defilements, one does not abandon future defilements, one does not abandon present defilements, then there is no development of the path, there is no realization of its fruition, there is no realization of phenomena? That is not so. There is development of the path, there is realization of its fruition, there is realization of phenomena. In what way?

Suppose there was a young tree with unborn fruit, and a man cut the root, then the unborn fruit of the tree remains unborn and do not come to be born, they remain ungenerated and do not come to be generated, they remain unarisen and do not come to be arisen, they remain unmanifest and do not come to be manifested. So too, arising is the cause, arising is the condition, for the generation of defilements. Seeing danger in arising, mind enters & launches out into non-arising. With mind entering & launching into non-arising the defilements that would be generated with arising as their condition remain unborn and do not come to be born. The potential defilements remain ungenerated and do not come to be generated, they remain unarisen and do not come to be arisen, they remain unmanifest and do not come to be manifested. So with the cessation of the cause there is cessation of suffering. Occurrence, sign, accumulation is a cause, is a condition, for the generation of defilements. Seeing danger in accumulation, mind enters & launches into non-accumulation. With mind entering & launching into non-accumulation the defilements that would be generated with accumulation as their condition remain unborn and do not come to be born. The potential defilements remain ungenerated and do not come to be generated, they remain unarisen and do not come to be arisen, they remain unmanifest and do not come to be manifested. So with the cessation of the cause there is cessation of suffering. Thus there is development of the path, there is realization of its fruition, there is realization of factors.
"Life is a struggle. Life will throw curveballs at you, it will humble you, it will attempt to break you down. And just when you think things are starting to look up, life will smack you back down with ruthless indifference..."

Mukunda
Posts: 295
Joined: Fri Jan 29, 2010 1:54 am

Re: Niganthas Vs Modern day idealogy

Post by Mukunda » Wed Mar 24, 2010 6:03 pm

Brizzy wrote:Goenka talks about past actions rising to the surface. His concentration technique is aimed specifically to induce sensations, rather than tranquility.
I was never taught to induce sensations, but rather to observe their arising. Perhaps therein lies the problem.

meindzai
Posts: 595
Joined: Thu Jan 15, 2009 8:10 pm

Re: Niganthas Vs Modern day idealogy

Post by meindzai » Wed Mar 24, 2010 6:48 pm

Mukunda wrote:
Brizzy wrote:Goenka talks about past actions rising to the surface. His concentration technique is aimed specifically to induce sensations, rather than tranquility.
I was never taught to induce sensations, but rather to observe their arising. Perhaps therein lies the problem.
Exactly. Buddha's problem with the Jains was that by practicing self mortification, they were just creating more kamma in the process.

i.e. if I hit you in the face with a shovel, that's an unwholesome action, which will ripen at some point for me. (For you it's your bad kamma ripening, so...you're welcome?)

But hitting my*self* in the face, whether that is the ripening of unwholesome kamma or not, is kind of pointless, because all I've done is create more unwholesome kamma by doing the action.

I believe it's that simple. Sitting in mindfulness and observing sensations, feelings, etc. isn't anything like this shovel-face-hitting-asceticism (or any kind of asceticism - same thing). The Goekna method, as far as I know, is adopted from Satipatthana - nothing ascetic in there.

-M

Brizzy

Re: Niganthas Vs Modern day idealogy

Post by Brizzy » Fri Mar 26, 2010 11:04 am

meindzai wrote:
Mukunda wrote:
Brizzy wrote:Goenka talks about past actions rising to the surface. His concentration technique is aimed specifically to induce sensations, rather than tranquility.
I was never taught to induce sensations, but rather to observe their arising. Perhaps therein lies the problem.
Exactly. Buddha's problem with the Jains was that by practicing self mortification, they were just creating more kamma in the process.

i.e. if I hit you in the face with a shovel, that's an unwholesome action, which will ripen at some point for me. (For you it's your bad kamma ripening, so...you're welcome?)

But hitting my*self* in the face, whether that is the ripening of unwholesome kamma or not, is kind of pointless, because all I've done is create more unwholesome kamma by doing the action.

I believe it's that simple. Sitting in mindfulness and observing sensations, feelings, etc. isn't anything like this shovel-face-hitting-asceticism (or any kind of asceticism - same thing). The Goekna method, as far as I know, is adopted from Satipatthana - nothing ascetic in there.

-M
The whole practice is designed to produce unpleasant sensations. It is your "Attention" that is proliferating these sensations. If you turned your attention away from these unpleasant sensations, towards something wholesome, then the sensations would subside.

That is not to say that unpleasant sensations do not appear in Right Meditation, it is just that one does not go looking for them in order to impose an "equanimous" mind upon them & thereby eradicating past kamma. Goenka will often explain that these "Gross" sensations are "DEEP, DEEP" sankharas from our past, rising to the surface to be eradicated.

This idea of "one pointed" concentration is strange. We learn from the Buddha that everything is change and we are then told to "FIX" our minds on one "POINT". So in an ever changing world we are told that we can come to understand this world, by grimly trying to fix our minds statically. Now this would produce an enormous internal struggle (pain :cry: ) but if we are bloody minded enough we can come through it, and the brief abscence of the pain is great :smile: and then we "Start Again" :jawdrop:

The idea of a collected mind, as found in the suttas is a mind that is together & powerful - in tune with the body and is malleable enough for vipassana (a happy mind :twothumbsup: ). The one pointed mind sounds more like a "Hindu Oneness" approach rather than Buddha Dhamma.

People are told to develop equanimity to painful sensations - all that is being developed is willpower/strength of mind. If people developed a happy mind, this would lead into equanimity. Goenka puts it the other way round "Be equanimous - it will lead to happiness!" The Buddha teaches, to develop a joyful/happy mind and this leads to equanimity. Its a really important point, it is very easy to fool ourselves and take willpower to be equanimity. Equanimity is the profound jhana within which the Buddha encourages his monks to make a breakthrough (any jhana will do), it is not a mind state that can be "set up" it has to be developed and developed through jhana.

Goenka will often tell the tale of a weapons engineer who developed guidance systems for missiles. His sankharas/kamma were so bad he was jumping about his cell through the heat & pain of his evil past. Does this not sound a little like Nigantha asceticism. Does any of this sound like the Buddhas explanation of how kamma works?

People on the thread seem to object strongly to my views on Goenka Vippasana and I can understand why. However, if people are so sure of the truth of this practice and it is truly the Buddhas Dhamma, why is there no trace of it in the suttas?

Words & meanings can be changed & stretched, and people may point to the satipatthana sutta, but the satippathana sutta does not promote this technique. Goenkas technique produces a very strong & hard mind, that can overcome pain through vigorous exertion - mindfulness is produced, but look at the Buddhas explanation for this "type" of practice :-

http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka ... .than.html


This sutta describes a "Goenka Approach" to mindfulness, which the Buddha ultimately rejected in favour of the beautiful memory from his childhood under a rose-apple tree.

:smile:

User avatar
Ben
Posts: 18442
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2008 12:49 am
Location: kanamaluka

Re: Niganthas Vs Modern day idealogy

Post by Ben » Fri Mar 26, 2010 11:14 am

Your assessment is nothing but a gross misrepresentation.
With each post it becomes increasingly evident that you are merely grinding an axe.
“No lists of things to be done. The day providential to itself. The hour. There is no later. This is later. All things of grace and beauty such that one holds them to one's heart have a common provenance in pain. Their birth in grief and ashes.”
- Cormac McCarthy, The Road

Learn this from the waters:
in mountain clefts and chasms,
loud gush the streamlets,
but great rivers flow silently.
- Sutta Nipata 3.725

Compassionate Hands Foundation (Buddhist aid in Myanmar) • Buddhist Global ReliefUNHCR

e: ben.dhammawheel@gmail.com..

Brizzy

Re: Niganthas Vs Modern day idealogy

Post by Brizzy » Fri Mar 26, 2010 11:51 am

Ben wrote:Your assessment is nothing but a gross misrepresentation.
With each post it becomes increasingly evident that you are merely grinding an axe.
If you mean I have serious problems with a practice & technique that purports itself to be the Buddhas Dhamma - when it has fundamental differences from the Buddhas Dhamma - then yes I am an axe grinder :smile:

Who is your axe being ground for?

:smile:

meindzai
Posts: 595
Joined: Thu Jan 15, 2009 8:10 pm

Re: Niganthas Vs Modern day idealogy

Post by meindzai » Fri Mar 26, 2010 4:21 pm

Brizzy wrote:
Ben wrote:Your assessment is nothing but a gross misrepresentation.
With each post it becomes increasingly evident that you are merely grinding an axe.
If you mean I have serious problems with a practice & technique that purports itself to be the Buddhas Dhamma - when it has fundamental differences from the Buddhas Dhamma - then yes I am an axe grinder :smile:

Who is your axe being ground for?

:smile:
I have never known Ben to axe grind when it comes to Dhamma.

Your posts are full of unsupported opinion, misrepresentation of the Dhamma and Goenka, along with your own personal traumas. I am sorry you have had such "grim" and "painful" experiences with meditation, but not everybody has experienced it that way.

Defaming Goenka on a public forum as being adhamma is probably not the best approach at dealing with whatever happened to you.

-M

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

Re: Niganthas Vs Modern day idealogy

Post by tiltbillings » Fri Mar 26, 2010 5:11 pm

Brizzy wrote:
Ben wrote:Your assessment is nothing but a gross misrepresentation.
With each post it becomes increasingly evident that you are merely grinding an axe.
If you mean I have serious problems with a practice & technique that purports itself to be the Buddhas Dhamma - when it has fundamental differences from the Buddhas Dhamma - then yes I am an axe grinder

Who is your axe being ground for?
I see a lot of accusation flying about here from you, but I have yet to see you tie then directly to Goenka's actual teachings, using his words with references.
>> 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

User avatar
DNS
Site Admin
Posts: 11675
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 4:15 am
Location: Las Vegas, Nevada, Estados Unidos de América
Contact:

Re: Niganthas Vs Modern day idealogy

Post by DNS » Fri Mar 26, 2010 6:54 pm

Brizzy wrote:
David N. Snyder wrote:Goenka's answer and teaching seems very much inline with this from the Buddha:
"And how is striving fruitful, how is exertion fruitful? There is the case where a monk, when not loaded down, does not load himself down with pain, nor does he reject pleasure that accords with the Dhamma, although he is not fixated on that pleasure. He discerns that 'When I exert a [physical, verbal, or mental] fabrication against this cause of stress, then from the fabrication of exertion there is dispassion. When I look on with equanimity at that cause of stress, then from the development of equanimity there is dispassion.' So he exerts a fabrication against the cause of stress where there comes dispassion from the fabrication of exertion, and develops equanimity with regard to the cause of stress where there comes dispassion from the development of equanimity. Thus the stress where there comes dispassion from the fabrication of exertion is exhausted & the stress where there comes dispassion from the development of equanimity is exhausted."
MN 101
Goenka talks about past actions rising to the surface. His concentration technique is aimed specifically to induce sensations, rather than tranquility. These sensations are to be viewed as past kammas (sankharas) to be looked upon with equanimity.(thereby eradicating kammas & not producing further kammas). This does not seem to me, quite what the Buddha is saying - it is the desire & lust that are to abandoned, past kammas are not eradicated. There is a sutta where the buddha talks of metta, being an escape from bad kamma, but even here, old kamma is not eradicated - it is simply overwhelmed by metta. I will endeavour to find the particular sutta.
"Thus the stress where there comes dispassion from the fabrication of exertion is exhausted"
from the above quote MN 101

Goenka's teachings have nothing in common with Jain philosophy and are completely in line with Buddha-Dhamma.

PeterB
Posts: 3909
Joined: Tue Feb 17, 2009 12:35 pm

Re: Niganthas Vs Modern day idealogy

Post by PeterB » Fri Mar 26, 2010 7:06 pm

Brizzy wrote:
Ben wrote:Your assessment is nothing but a gross misrepresentation.
With each post it becomes increasingly evident that you are merely grinding an axe.
If you mean I have serious problems with a practice & technique that purports itself to be the Buddhas Dhamma - when it has fundamental differences from the Buddhas Dhamma - then yes I am an axe grinder :smile:

Who is your axe being ground for?

:smile:
This is a calumny against Goenka and a calumny against Ben.

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

Re: Niganthas Vs Modern day idealogy

Post by tiltbillings » Fri Mar 26, 2010 7:18 pm

PeterB wrote:
Brizzy wrote:
Ben wrote:Your assessment is nothing but a gross misrepresentation.
With each post it becomes increasingly evident that you are merely grinding an axe.
If you mean I have serious problems with a practice & technique that purports itself to be the Buddhas Dhamma - when it has fundamental differences from the Buddhas Dhamma - then yes I am an axe grinder :smile:

Who is your axe being ground for?

:smile:
This is a calumny against Goenka and a calumny against Ben.
The problem with the Brizzy's assertions, he has really offered no real argument or carelly cited support for what he is claiming, which makes it kind of hard not to see this a bit a blowhard-ishness. The OP started poorly and it has not really gotten any better.
>> 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

User avatar
cooran
Posts: 8504
Joined: Tue Jan 06, 2009 11:32 pm
Location: Queensland, Australia

Re: Niganthas Vs Modern day idealogy

Post by cooran » Fri Mar 26, 2010 9:29 pm

Am I the only one who wonders if Dhamma Wheel is experiencing the games of a troll or game player - in this and the Vipassana thread?
---The trouble is that you think you have time---
---Worry is the Interest, paid in advance, on a debt you may never owe---
---It's not what happens to you in life that is important ~ it's what you do with it ---

Brizzy

Re: Niganthas Vs Modern day idealogy

Post by Brizzy » Sun Apr 11, 2010 3:07 pm

cooran wrote:Am I the only one who wonders if Dhamma Wheel is experiencing the games of a troll or game player - in this and the Vipassana thread?

Excuse my ignorance, as I take it that this is aimed at me :cry: - but what do you mean by a "troll" or "game player"? I am blissfully unaware of most "computer speak".

Is it someone who is prepared to put the suttas as the centre-piece and consider everything else almost irrelevant? (unless it is inline with the suttas/vinaya).

:smile:

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: DarrenM, Fruitzilla, markandeya, SDC, vishy89 and 59 guests