Dhamma Wheel Buddhist Forum

Dan74 wrote: On the other hand, it is not controversial that formal practice is somewhat artificial at the outset. There is craving present, spiritual materialism of some sort, if you will, and conceit about progress is bound to creep in at some stage. This has been recognized for 2500 years I think and there are antidotes for this. That's why having regular contact with a good teacher can be so valuable.

See this post for a link to Ajahn Brahm sounding like Khun Sujin, banging on about cause and effect, lack of control, and the importance of hearing the Dhamma:
http://www.dhammawheel.com/viewtopic.ph ... 09#p243109


Mike

mikenz66 wrote:See this post for a link to Ajahn Brahm sounding like Khun Sujin, banging on about cause and effect, lack of control, and the importance of hearing the Dhamma:

But the difference is that Ajahn Brahm actually teaches Jhāna and insight based on it. He doesn't teach to: live normal life, read a bit of Abhidhamma, and hope that somehow aeons in the future, satipaṭṭhāna will come like a knight in shining armor and rescue one.

P.S.
I find Ajahn Brahm to be very inspirational.

Alex123 wrote:

mikenz66 wrote:See this post for a link to Ajahn Brahm sounding like Khun Sujin, banging on about cause and effect, lack of control, and the importance of hearing the Dhamma:

But the difference is that Ajahn Brahm actually teaches Jhāna and insight based on it. He doesn't teach to: live normal life, read a bit of Abhidhamma, and hope that somehow aeons in the future, satipaṭṭhāna will come like a knight in shining armor and rescue one.

Yes, based on causes and conditions.

Anyway, my point was that there is nothing special (in Buddhist circles) about pointing out that all actions are dependent on causes and conditions and that you can't will yourself into satipatthana, jhana, or awakening.


Mike

And here's another example, from Ajahn Amaro:
http://www.dhammawheel.com/viewtopic.ph ... 00#p218121


Mike

mikenz66 wrote:And here's another example, from Ajahn Amaro:
http://www.dhammawheel.com/viewtopic.ph ... 00#p218121


Mike

Ajahn Amaro wrote: So there's a lot of doing.

kirk5a wrote:

Ajahn Amaro wrote: So there's a lot of doing.

Of course. There is a lot of doing in the suttas, but not by a self...


Mike

mikenz66 wrote:

Dan74 wrote: On the other hand, it is not controversial that formal practice is somewhat artificial at the outset. There is craving present, spiritual materialism of some sort, if you will, and conceit about progress is bound to creep in at some stage. This has been recognized for 2500 years I think and there are antidotes for this. That's why having regular contact with a good teacher can be so valuable.

See this post for a link to Ajahn Brahm sounding like Khun Sujin, banging on about cause and effect, lack of control, and the importance of hearing the Dhamma:
http://www.dhammawheel.com/viewtopic.ph ... 09#p243109


Mike

Thanks, Mike! Sounds to me like a very commonsense teaching really. We set up the conditions for practice. It's kamma really, that's all.

Dan74 wrote:

mikenz66 wrote:

Dan74 wrote: On the other hand, it is not controversial that formal practice is somewhat artificial at the outset. There is craving present, spiritual materialism of some sort, if you will, and conceit about progress is bound to creep in at some stage. This has been recognized for 2500 years I think and there are antidotes for this. That's why having regular contact with a good teacher can be so valuable.

See this post for a link to Ajahn Brahm sounding like Khun Sujin, banging on about cause and effect, lack of control, and the importance of hearing the Dhamma:
http://www.dhammawheel.com/viewtopic.ph ... 09#p243109


Mike

Thanks, Mike! Sounds to me like a very commonsense teaching really. We set up the conditions for practice. It's kamma really, that's all.

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

mikenz66 wrote:Anyway, my point was that there is nothing special (in Buddhist circles) about pointing out that all actions are dependent on causes and conditions and that you can't will yourself into satipatthana, jhana, or awakening.

If that is really accurate, then how would one follow the Buddha's instruction to "remain focused on the body in the body" or "practice jhana" ?

Greetings,

This topic reminds me of an applied enactment of MN 2.

Sabbasava Sutta wrote:"As he attends inappropriately in this way, one of six kinds of view arises in him: The view I have a self arises in him as true & established, or the view I have no self arises in him as true & established...

... and there is so much mental contortion required in order to substantiate and adhere to this inappropriately arisen view of "no self".

Metta,
Retro.

I am not sure if I am catching retro's drift correctly, but in a relative sense most of us have a notion of self and application of effort. When unwholesome thoughts of tendencies are perceived and are not indulged contrary to the habit, there is usually an application of effort. When we are in a wholesome state, with sharp and spacious awareness, it takes some effort to attend than we do not slip into the habits. And usually we fail.

On the other hand, since in reality there are just causes and conditions, effort is part of these and no self is actually applying one self at all. But that is not what an unenlightened worlding experiences and is more likely to understand the above as license to just float along. This too is part of causes and conditions and that's why no self, no effort is a pretty dangerous teaching that is more likely than not to lead to the continuation of unwholesome habits rather than their uprooting...

kirk5a wrote:

mikenz66 wrote:Anyway, my point was that there is nothing special (in Buddhist circles) about pointing out that all actions are dependent on causes and conditions and that you can't will yourself into satipatthana, jhana, or awakening.

If that is really accurate, then how would one follow the Buddha's instruction to "remain focused on the body in the body" or "practice jhana" ?

Well, that's the puzzle, isn't it? Clearly, from the Anatta-lakkhana sutta, one can't just will one's form, feeling, etc to be such and such. http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka ... .nymo.html

Nevertheless, to quote from one the suttas the Ajahn Brahm discusses in the link I gave (most are not on Access to Insight, unfortunately):

"In a person of right view, right resolve comes into being. In a person of right resolve, right speech. In a person of right speech, right action. In a person of right action, right livelihood. In a person of right livelihood, right effort. In a person of right effort, right mindfulness. In a person of right mindfulness, right concentration. In a person of right concentration, right knowledge. In a person of right knowledge, right release.
http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka ... .than.html

And a sutta related to one that he discussed:

"For a person endowed with virtue, consummate in virtue, there is no need for an act of will, 'May freedom from remorse arise in me.' It is in the nature of things that freedom from remorse arises in a person endowed with virtue, consummate in virtue.
... joy ... rapture ... serenity ... pleasure ... concentration ... know and see ... disenchantment ... dispassion ... release.
http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka ... .than.html

So right view conditions ... effort conditions mindfulness conditions jhana, and so on.

Of course, Ajahn Brahm's conclusion appears, at least on the surface, a little different from the Khun Sujin position.
To quote from the talk I liked to:

"You can't develop them, just look at the Anatta-lakkana sutta...This is the great myth, that we can make ourselves enlightened... we do need another ... that was the great thing about a Buddha arising ... it makes enlightenment possible... just cause and effect ..."
http://www.dhammawheel.com/viewtopic.ph ... 09#p243109

I.e. the instructions from the Buddha, and/or Ajahn Brahm (or some other teacher) are what conditions "your" mindfulness, jhana, release...


Mike

retrofuturist wrote:Greetings,

This topic reminds me of an applied enactment of MN 2.

Sabbasava Sutta wrote:"As he attends inappropriately in this way, one of six kinds of view arises in him: The view I have a self arises in him as true & established, or the view I have no self arises in him as true & established...

... and there is so much mental contortion required in order to substantiate and adhere to this inappropriately arisen view of "no self".

Metta,
Retro.

This seems a bit cryptic. It might help if you were to draw out what you mean in more detail.

Greetings,

tiltbillings wrote:This seems a bit cryptic. It might help if you were to draw out what you mean in more detail.

The "more detail" is that if people weren't so obsessed with trying to prove (either to themselves or others) the validity of this inappropriately derived view that "I have no self", both this topic and their own thought processes might be greatly simplified.

"This is called a thicket of views, a wilderness of views, a contortion of views, a writhing of views, a fetter of views. Bound by a fetter of views, the uninstructed run-of-the-mill person is not freed from birth, aging, & death, from sorrow, lamentation, pain, distress, & despair. He is not freed, I tell you, from suffering & stress.

"The well-instructed disciple of the noble ones — who has regard for noble ones, is well-versed & disciplined in their Dhamma; who has regard for men of integrity, is well-versed & disciplined in their Dhamma — discerns what ideas are fit for attention and what ideas are unfit for attention. This being so, he does not attend to ideas unfit for attention and attends [instead] to ideas fit for attention."

It's relevant to this topic, because "I have no self" is listed in MN 2 as an inappropriate view, and inappropriately held views feed the asava of ignorance. In other words, they directly oppose the causes for wisdom, which are the subject of this topic.

"And what are the ideas unfit for attention that he does not attend to? Whatever ideas such that, when he attends to them...the unarisen fermentation of ignorance arises in him, and the arisen fermentation of ignorance increases. These are the ideas unfit for attention that he does not attend to."

Metta,
Retro.

retrofuturist wrote:Greetings,

tiltbillings wrote:This seems a bit cryptic. It might help if you were to draw out what you mean in more detail.

The "more detail" is that if people weren't so obsessed with trying to prove (either to themselves or others) the validity of this inappropriately derived view that "I have no self", both this topic and their own thought processes might be greatly simplified.

For example?