Disagreeing with Leigh Brasington

General discussion of issues related to Theravada Meditation, e.g. meditation postures, developing a regular sitting practice, skillfully relating to difficulties and hindrances, etc.
User avatar
tiltbillings
Posts: 23012
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2008 9:25 am

Disagreeing with Leigh Brasington

Postby tiltbillings » Sat Oct 13, 2012 2:36 am

The following two posts were taken from this thread Interview with Leigh Brasington (concerning jhana).
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

      >> 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

ignobleone
Posts: 150
Joined: Fri Feb 03, 2012 7:15 pm

Re: Disagreeing with Leigh Brasington

Postby ignobleone » Fri Oct 19, 2012 1:28 pm

tiltbillings wrote:This is a bit of an Interview with Leigh Brasington. It was scanned, but I cannot guarantee that I caught all the bugs.


LB: Partially, it's because there are three major sources of jhana material, all of which are incomplete.

LB: In the suttas, the jhanas are described most of the time using a standard formula. The standard formula for the first jhana has four factors one-pointedness is not mentioned. There are just the four factors of vitakka, vicara, piti, and sukha.

The interview clearly shows the teacher's lack of conviction in the Dhamma and conviction in the Sangha. Most likely he never have learned this very basic of the Teaching. No one should learn from such teachers.

User avatar
daverupa
Posts: 5974
Joined: Mon Jan 31, 2011 6:58 pm

Re: Disagreeing with Leigh Brasington

Postby daverupa » Fri Oct 19, 2012 5:19 pm

ignobleone wrote:The interview clearly shows the teacher's lack of conviction in the Dhamma and conviction in the Sangha.


In which way(s)?
    "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]

ignobleone
Posts: 150
Joined: Fri Feb 03, 2012 7:15 pm

Re: Disagreeing with Leigh Brasington

Postby ignobleone » Sat Oct 20, 2012 3:23 am

daverupa wrote:
ignobleone wrote:The interview clearly shows the teacher's lack of conviction in the Dhamma and conviction in the Sangha.


In which way(s)?

Lack of conviction in the Dhamma: he hasn't arrived at certainty with regard to the True Dhamma.
Lack of conviction in the Sangha:
LB:We might ask how this happened. Think about who was preserving the Buddha's teaching during these thousand years. It's a bunch of guys hanging out in the woods -- no TV, no women. They've got just their minds to work with. And so they start working on the jhanas, And if somebody can take it a little bit deeper, obviously he's doing it "better." The natural human tendency is, "Well, if! can do it better than you are doing it, I'm doing it the right way, and I'll teach you to do it my way."

It's clear he has no conviction in the Sangha, even he sounds kinda insulting them. He thinks the Sangha has failed preserving the Dhamma. Thus we can say he hasn't arrived at certainty with regard to the True Dhamma.
Also he misses some points in the suttas regarding Jhana (all he knows seems to be only jhana factors,) but he says the suttas is incomplete.

User avatar
tiltbillings
Posts: 23012
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2008 9:25 am

Re: Disagreeing with Leigh Brasington

Postby tiltbillings » Sat Oct 20, 2012 3:36 am

ignobleone wrote:
daverupa wrote:
ignobleone wrote:The interview clearly shows the teacher's lack of conviction in the Dhamma and conviction in the Sangha.


In which way(s)?

Lack of conviction in the Dhamma: he hasn't arrived at certainty with regard to the True Dhamma.
There is no way you can honestly say that unless you are claiming iddhis.

Lack of conviction in the Sangha:
LB:We might ask how this happened. Think about who was preserving the Buddha's teaching during these thousand years. It's a bunch of guys hanging out in the woods -- no TV, no women. They've got just their minds to work with. And so they start working on the jhanas, And if somebody can take it a little bit deeper, obviously he's doing it "better." The natural human tendency is, "Well, if! can do it better than you are doing it, I'm doing it the right way, and I'll teach you to do it my way."

It's clear he has no conviction in the Sangha, even he sounds kinda insulting them. He thinks the Sangha has failed preserving the Dhamma. Thus we can say he hasn't arrived at certainty with regard to the True Dhamma.
Also he misses some points in the suttas regarding Jhana (all he knows seems to be only jhana factors,) but he says the suttas is incomplete.
Is his discussion here insulting? Probably, if one is so rigid that there cannot possibly be any humor in one's discussion of these things. The point is, as has been repeatedly pointed out by others in various threads here that there seems to be a significant difference between the portrayal of the jhanas in the suttas from what we find in the commentarial work such as the Visuddhimagga.
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

      >> 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

ignobleone
Posts: 150
Joined: Fri Feb 03, 2012 7:15 pm

Re: Disagreeing with Leigh Brasington

Postby ignobleone » Sat Oct 20, 2012 3:57 am

tiltbillings wrote:
ignobleone wrote:Lack of conviction in the Dhamma: he hasn't arrived at certainty with regard to the True Dhamma.
There is no way you can honestly say that unless you are claiming iddhis.

Nope, there's no iddhis involved. You have thought too far. My explanation about his lack of conviction in the Sangha explains it, if you read thoroughly.

It's clear he has no conviction in the Sangha, even he sounds kinda insulting them. He thinks the Sangha has failed preserving the Dhamma. Thus we can say he hasn't arrived at certainty with regard to the True Dhamma.
Also he misses some points in the suttas regarding Jhana (all he knows seems to be only jhana factors,) but he says the suttas is incomplete.
Is his discussion here insulting? Probably, if one is so rigid that there cannot possibly be any humor in one's discussion of these things. The point is, as has been repeatedly pointed out by others in various threads here that there seems to be a significant difference between the portrayal of the jhanas in the suttas from what we find in the commentarial work such as the Visuddhimagga.

Let me try to make it clearer.
Sangha has failed ---> Dhamma is not preserved ---> no way LB can learn the True Dhamma ---> LB hasn't arrived at certainty with regard to the True Dhamma.
Very simple. Nothing to do with commentary (Visuddhimagga.)

User avatar
tiltbillings
Posts: 23012
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2008 9:25 am

Re: Disagreeing with Leigh Brasington

Postby tiltbillings » Sat Oct 20, 2012 4:06 am

ignobleone wrote:
tiltbillings wrote:
ignobleone wrote:Lack of conviction in the Dhamma: he hasn't arrived at certainty with regard to the True Dhamma.
There is no way you can honestly say that unless you are claiming iddhis.

Nope, there's no iddhis involved. You have thought too far. My explanation about his lack of conviction in the Sangha explains it, if you read thoroughly.
I read it thoroughly and it is baseless and an unnecessary personal attack on this man.

It's clear he has no conviction in the Sangha, even he sounds kinda insulting them. He thinks the Sangha has failed preserving the Dhamma. Thus we can say he hasn't arrived at certainty with regard to the True Dhamma.
Also he misses some points in the suttas regarding Jhana (all he knows seems to be only jhana factors,) but he says the suttas is incomplete.
Is his discussion here insulting? Probably, if one is so rigid that there cannot possibly be any humor in one's discussion of these things. The point is, as has been repeatedly pointed out by others in various threads here that there seems to be a significant difference between the portrayal of the jhanas in the suttas from what we find in the commentarial work such as the Visuddhimagga.

Let me try to make it clearer.
Sangha has failed ---> Dhamma is not preserved ---> no way LB can learn the True Dhamma ---> LB hasn't arrived at certainty with regard to the True Dhamma.
Very simple. Nothing to do with commentary (Visuddhimagga.)
Less clear.
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

      >> 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

User avatar
ground
Posts: 2591
Joined: Wed Nov 25, 2009 6:01 am

Re: Disagreeing with Leigh Brasington

Postby ground » Sat Oct 20, 2012 4:17 am

ignobleone wrote:The interview clearly shows the teacher's lack of conviction in the Dhamma and conviction in the Sangha. Most likely he never have learned this very basic of the Teaching. No one should learn from such teachers.

This argument recalls mind set of other advocates of other religions. :sage:

ignobleone
Posts: 150
Joined: Fri Feb 03, 2012 7:15 pm

Re: Disagreeing with Leigh Brasington

Postby ignobleone » Sat Oct 20, 2012 4:18 am

tiltbillings wrote:
Let me try to make it clearer.
Sangha has failed ---> Dhamma is not preserved ---> no way LB can learn the True Dhamma ---> LB hasn't arrived at certainty with regard to the True Dhamma.
Very simple. Nothing to do with commentary (Visuddhimagga.)
Less clear.

Clear is relative (depends on the person.) If it's still not clear, sorry, nothing more I can do.
Last edited by ignobleone on Sat Oct 20, 2012 4:26 am, edited 1 time in total.

ignobleone
Posts: 150
Joined: Fri Feb 03, 2012 7:15 pm

Re: Disagreeing with Leigh Brasington

Postby ignobleone » Sat Oct 20, 2012 4:23 am

ground wrote:
ignobleone wrote:The interview clearly shows the teacher's lack of conviction in the Dhamma and conviction in the Sangha. Most likely he never have learned this very basic of the Teaching. No one should learn from such teachers.

This argument recalls mind set of other advocates of other religions. :sage:

Saddha is number one on the list in learning the Teaching. Whether you like it or not, it's up to you.

User avatar
tiltbillings
Posts: 23012
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2008 9:25 am

Re: Disagreeing with Leigh Brasington

Postby tiltbillings » Sat Oct 20, 2012 4:25 am

ignobleone wrote:
tiltbillings wrote:
Let me try to make it clearer.
Sangha has failed ---> Dhamma is not preserved ---> no way LB can learn the True Dhamma ---> LB hasn't arrived at certainty with regard to the True Dhamma.
Very simple. Nothing to do with commentary (Visuddhimagga.)
Less clear.

Clear is relative. If it's still not clear, sorry, nothing more I can do.
You have slammed Brasington. So let us look at the basis of that. So, you know -- you are the arbiter of -- what the "True Dhamma" is. Is that what you are saying here? Are you telling us that you have unshakable confidence as to what is and is not the "True Dhamma" and that you know for absolute certain -- without any question -- what the "True Dhamma" actually is?
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

      >> 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

User avatar
ground
Posts: 2591
Joined: Wed Nov 25, 2009 6:01 am

Re: Disagreeing with Leigh Brasington

Postby ground » Sat Oct 20, 2012 4:26 am

ignobleone wrote:
ground wrote:
ignobleone wrote:The interview clearly shows the teacher's lack of conviction in the Dhamma and conviction in the Sangha. Most likely he never have learned this very basic of the Teaching. No one should learn from such teachers.

This argument recalls mind set of other advocates of other religions. :sage:

Saddha is number one on the list in learning the Teaching. Whether you like it or not, it's up to you.

Neither liking nor disliking. No involvement. :sage:

User avatar
tiltbillings
Posts: 23012
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2008 9:25 am

Re: Disagreeing with Leigh Brasington

Postby tiltbillings » Sat Oct 20, 2012 4:27 am

ground wrote:Neither liking nor disliking. No involvement.
He said, involving himself in this conversation.
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

      >> 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

User avatar
ground
Posts: 2591
Joined: Wed Nov 25, 2009 6:01 am

Re: Disagreeing with Leigh Brasington

Postby ground » Sat Oct 20, 2012 4:29 am

tiltbillings wrote:
ground wrote:Neither liking nor disliking. No involvement.
He said, involving himself in this conversation.

What is involved? :sage:

User avatar
tiltbillings
Posts: 23012
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2008 9:25 am

Re: Disagreeing with Leigh Brasington

Postby tiltbillings » Sat Oct 20, 2012 4:38 am

ground wrote:
tiltbillings wrote:
ground wrote:Neither liking nor disliking. No involvement.
He said, involving himself in this conversation.

What is involved?
Obviously that which asked the question: "What is involved?" It seems not to be able to extricate itself from such involvements, and doubtless, it will have what it thinks is a snappy answer to this.
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

      >> 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

ignobleone
Posts: 150
Joined: Fri Feb 03, 2012 7:15 pm

Re: Disagreeing with Leigh Brasington

Postby ignobleone » Sat Oct 20, 2012 4:39 am

tiltbillings wrote:
ignobleone wrote:Clear is relative. If it's still not clear, sorry, nothing more I can do.
You have slammed Brasington. So let us look at the basis of that. So, you know -- you are the arbiter of -- what the "True Dhamma" is. Is that what you are saying here? Are you telling us that you have unshakable confidence as to what is and is not the "True Dhamma" and that you know for absolute certain -- without any question -- what the "True Dhamma" actually is?

"True Dhamma" is used in this sutta http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/an/an04/an04.184.than.html, I only borrow it.

User avatar
tiltbillings
Posts: 23012
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2008 9:25 am

Re: Disagreeing with Leigh Brasington

Postby tiltbillings » Sat Oct 20, 2012 4:41 am

ignobleone wrote:
tiltbillings wrote:
ignobleone wrote:Clear is relative. If it's still not clear, sorry, nothing more I can do.
You have slammed Brasington. So let us look at the basis of that. So, you know -- you are the arbiter of -- what the "True Dhamma" is. Is that what you are saying here? Are you telling us that you have unshakable confidence as to what is and is not the "True Dhamma" and that you know for absolute certain -- without any question -- what the "True Dhamma" actually is?

"True Dhamma" is used in this sutta http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/an/an04/an04.184.than.html, I only borrow it.
That's nice, but you have yet to answer my questions.
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

      >> 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

User avatar
ground
Posts: 2591
Joined: Wed Nov 25, 2009 6:01 am

Re: Disagreeing with Leigh Brasington

Postby ground » Sat Oct 20, 2012 4:52 am

ground wrote:There is nothing that cares.
Sure, which is why it took all that effort to makes its point.

Now, back to the actual topic, please.

ignobleone
Posts: 150
Joined: Fri Feb 03, 2012 7:15 pm

Re: Disagreeing with Leigh Brasington

Postby ignobleone » Sat Oct 20, 2012 4:59 am

tiltbillings wrote:You have slammed Brasington. So let us look at the basis of that. So, you know -- you are the arbiter of -- what the "True Dhamma" is. Is that what you are saying here? Are you telling us that you have unshakable confidence as to what is and is not the "True Dhamma" and that you know for absolute certain -- without any question -- what the "True Dhamma" actually is?

First, it's not about absolute certain. Absolute certain happens if and only if the Buddha is still alive and you hear it directly from him. Agree?

User avatar
tiltbillings
Posts: 23012
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2008 9:25 am

Re: Disagreeing with Leigh Brasington

Postby tiltbillings » Sat Oct 20, 2012 5:01 am

ground wrote:
ground wrote:There is nothing that cares.
Sure, which is why it took all that effort to makes its point.
In other words, it, whatever it is, cares. And back to the OP rather than these non-productive side trips.
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

      >> 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


Return to “General meditation-related issues”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 18 guests

Google Saffron, Theravada Search Engine