The Secular Buddhist

[Sanghamitta]

Greetings Sanghamitta,

Believing is pointless when that which is believed is untrue. Even more when it is true.
That is not an attempt to sound " Zenny"...its just a fact.

Can what you say here be resolved with MN 60, or do you believe MN 60 is in error?

Metta,
Retro.

I think that when Luang Por Chah said that "the only book worth reading is the heart " he actually meant it. He was not being provocative or flippant.

[retrofuturist]

Greetings Sanghamitta,

I believe that goes nowhere towards answering the question, other than to imply that you will not stoop to such low depths as to read a sutta (yet ironically, you will read words on a Buddhist forum by those who clearly aren't Buddhas).

Whatever floats your boat down the Thames, I guess.

Metta,
Retro.

[Sanghamitta]

Well that assumes that I have not read the suttas Retro..
In reality I attended I.B. Horner's classes on the suttas at the London Buddhist Society for several years. I also attended the classes given by the great Pali scholar Dr Ven H Saddhatissa at the London Buddhist Vihara for a year.
On meeting Ajahn Chah things took a different course.



edited to remove senior moment.

[Kenshou]

Who was himself well enough versed in the suttas, if I'm not mistaken. But of course every tool has its proper place and eventually things will need to develop a dimension beyond theory and literature. If that is what you mean to state then I have no disagreement. The majority of our real practice isn't going to take place in front of a book. But even so "reading the heart" is something easy to do wrong and all the more so without the right foundation. No reason that sutta cannot help construct that foundation in addition to our instruction and practice. I will look forward to the day when I can read my heart confidently and independently without training wheels but I don't expect to get up that hill without the right pair of boots.

[Sanghamitta]

The right foundation is I think the company of those who read their own hearts.

[Spiny O'Norman]

I think whatever label we apply to ourselves, secular, traditional, it is vital to support each others efforts.

I agree, assuming we include all the various diverse expressions of Buddhism, even the ones that we personally might think are a little wierd.

spiny

[Sanghamitta]

Absolutely.

[mikenz66]

Absolutely.

I've learned a lot from a "secular" mixing, such as this Dharma Gathering I mentioned here: viewtopic.php?f=22&t=11384 and occasional meditation/discussion at the "Insight" group that organised that (along with a Zen group). That there are various ways of exploring Dhamma/Dharma, and various resources one can draw on, is, I think, a positive, not a negative thing.

While I am certainly in the camp of "sticking mostly to one thing consistently" rather than dabbling in many different approaches, I think that's a very different attitude from: "my thing is the only right thing". Such secular gatherings are, among other benefits, a useful challenge, because they constantly expose traces of a "my thing is the only right thing" mindset ("Hmm... what's she talking about? Doesn't she know about ...").


Mike

[Spiny O'Norman]

Absolutely.

While I am certainly in the camp of "sticking mostly to one thing consistently" rather than dabbling in many different approaches, I think that's a very different attitude from: "my thing is the only right thing".

I agree. I think all we can say is that "my thing is the right thing for me at the moment".

Spiny