Anachronisms in Vinaya & whether a fresh start is due

[culaavuso]

The "pith instructions" of Vajrayana and Dzogchen are very good at what they do. I've been looking into the suttas to find how Buddha might have said those same or similar things so I can refer to those instead of the pith instructions.

One interesting set of parallels:

Dilgo Khyentse's pith instructions (on Dzogchen Meditation)

While mind is watching mind
Though there is nothing to see, it is vividly clear;
Uncontrived, free, and at ease in that state,
Rest naturally, simply undistracted.

Thai Forest tradition teacher Ajaan Dune Atulo

The mind sent outside is the origination of suffering.
The result of the mind sent outside is suffering.
The mind seeing the mind is the path.
The result of the mind seeing the mind is the cessation of suffering.

DN 22

And how does a monk remain focused on the mind in & of itself? There is the case where a monk, when the mind has passion, discerns that the mind has passion. When the mind is without passion, he discerns that the mind is without passion. When the mind has aversion, he discerns that the mind has aversion. When the mind is without aversion, he discerns that the mind is without aversion. When the mind has delusion, he discerns that the mind has delusion. When the mind is without delusion, he discerns that the mind is without delusion.

When the mind is restricted, he discerns that the mind is restricted. When the mind is scattered, he discerns that the mind is scattered. When the mind is enlarged, he discerns that the mind is enlarged. When the mind is not enlarged, he discerns that the mind is not enlarged. When the mind is surpassed, he discerns that the mind is surpassed. When the mind is unsurpassed, he discerns that the mind is unsurpassed. When the mind is concentrated, he discerns that the mind is concentrated. When the mind is not concentrated, he discerns that the mind is not concentrated. When the mind is released, he discerns that the mind is released. When the mind is not released, he discerns that the mind is not released.

The suttas are voluminous and contain instructions at many different levels, from the mundane to the "pith". Not everyone needs instruction in the mundane, and not everyone can understand instruction directly regarding the pith. Part of the Buddha's genius was the ability to teach people at various levels according to their capabilities and inclinations in a way that could help them discover and establish their practice upon the path. Simply giving everyone mundane instruction is not always helpful, and simply giving everyone instruction regarding the pith can lead to deep misunderstandings and misapprehension of the practice. It is a challenge for any teacher to understand their audience and provide teachings of the appropriate format at the appropriate time.

[suttametta]

Why do they want to be included in something they find "just outmoded and offensive"??

i guess its similar to the restaraunt with the best food in town having a dress code one doesn't agree with

The restaurant is under no obligation to serve food to just anyone who requests it, no matter how much the person might want it or be willing to pay for it in money.

- - -

Because they want to be a part of something true. And in this world, Buddhism is the best we have.

How do they know it is true, if they already think that the community who practices it, is "just outmoded and offensive"?

Thank you for this reference. I was not aware of it. I'm an looking in to it now. I'm not one for useless prattle. I'm here to solve my problems and I will act according to what I find.

If you're here to solve your problems, what has convinced you that this can be done here or that it is worth trying to do so here?

It's an experiment. Life is experiment. In Italian to experience is experimenter

[suttametta]

I tend to agree with the criticisms of Thassinaro in the text previous cited "Broken Buddha."

Leaving aside for the moment that those criticisms are based on "Thanissaro seems to imply" - seems to imply ...

There is very little evidence the current Pali tradition is capable of establishing arahants... The tradition appears atrophied, save for the rare exception of the occasional inspiring teacher.

I personally have zero political ambition, I merely want to help my niece and my wife with dhamma. I'm just working on what that really is...

So what would you esteem your status to be, in terms of attainment? Stream-winner?

My teachers tell me I'm enlightened already, and I ask about my notorious intemperance. HH Taklung Matul Rinpoche (who is a close friend) tells me its something like a scar. I do my best to fit in...

[suttametta]

The "pith instructions" of Vajrayana and Dzogchen are very good at what they do. I've been looking into the suttas to find how Buddha might have said those same or similar things so I can refer to those instead of the pith instructions.

One interesting set of parallels:

Dilgo Khyentse's pith instructions (on Dzogchen Meditation)

While mind is watching mind
Though there is nothing to see, it is vividly clear;
Uncontrived, free, and at ease in that state,
Rest naturally, simply undistracted.

Thai Forest tradition teacher Ajaan Dune Atulo

The mind sent outside is the origination of suffering.
The result of the mind sent outside is suffering.
The mind seeing the mind is the path.
The result of the mind seeing the mind is the cessation of suffering.

DN 22

And how does a monk remain focused on the mind in & of itself? There is the case where a monk, when the mind has passion, discerns that the mind has passion. When the mind is without passion, he discerns that the mind is without passion. When the mind has aversion, he discerns that the mind has aversion. When the mind is without aversion, he discerns that the mind is without aversion. When the mind has delusion, he discerns that the mind has delusion. When the mind is without delusion, he discerns that the mind is without delusion.

When the mind is restricted, he discerns that the mind is restricted. When the mind is scattered, he discerns that the mind is scattered. When the mind is enlarged, he discerns that the mind is enlarged. When the mind is not enlarged, he discerns that the mind is not enlarged. When the mind is surpassed, he discerns that the mind is surpassed. When the mind is unsurpassed, he discerns that the mind is unsurpassed. When the mind is concentrated, he discerns that the mind is concentrated. When the mind is not concentrated, he discerns that the mind is not concentrated. When the mind is released, he discerns that the mind is released. When the mind is not released, he discerns that the mind is not released.

The suttas are voluminous and contain instructions at many different levels, from the mundane to the "pith". Not everyone needs instruction in the mundane, and not everyone can understand instruction directly regarding the pith. Part of the Buddha's genius was the ability to teach people at various levels according to their capabilities and inclinations in a way that could help them discover and establish their practice upon the path. Simply giving everyone mundane instruction is not always helpful, and simply giving everyone instruction regarding the pith can lead to deep misunderstandings and misapprehension of the practice. It is a challenge for any teacher to understand their audience and provide teachings of the appropriate format at the appropriate time.

Thank you for this. Fantastic.

[Mkoll]

The "pith instructions" of Vajrayana and Dzogchen are very good at what they do. I've been looking into the suttas to find how Buddha might have said those same or similar things so I can refer to those instead of the pith instructions.

One interesting set of parallels:

Dilgo Khyentse's pith instructions (on Dzogchen Meditation)

While mind is watching mind
Though there is nothing to see, it is vividly clear;
Uncontrived, free, and at ease in that state,
Rest naturally, simply undistracted.

Thai Forest tradition teacher Ajaan Dune Atulo

The mind sent outside is the origination of suffering.
The result of the mind sent outside is suffering.
The mind seeing the mind is the path.
The result of the mind seeing the mind is the cessation of suffering.

DN 22

And how does a monk remain focused on the mind in & of itself? There is the case where a monk, when the mind has passion, discerns that the mind has passion. When the mind is without passion, he discerns that the mind is without passion. When the mind has aversion, he discerns that the mind has aversion. When the mind is without aversion, he discerns that the mind is without aversion. When the mind has delusion, he discerns that the mind has delusion. When the mind is without delusion, he discerns that the mind is without delusion.

When the mind is restricted, he discerns that the mind is restricted. When the mind is scattered, he discerns that the mind is scattered. When the mind is enlarged, he discerns that the mind is enlarged. When the mind is not enlarged, he discerns that the mind is not enlarged. When the mind is surpassed, he discerns that the mind is surpassed. When the mind is unsurpassed, he discerns that the mind is unsurpassed. When the mind is concentrated, he discerns that the mind is concentrated. When the mind is not concentrated, he discerns that the mind is not concentrated. When the mind is released, he discerns that the mind is released. When the mind is not released, he discerns that the mind is not released.

The suttas are voluminous and contain instructions at many different levels, from the mundane to the "pith". Not everyone needs instruction in the mundane, and not everyone can understand instruction directly regarding the pith. Part of the Buddha's genius was the ability to teach people at various levels according to their capabilities and inclinations in a way that could help them discover and establish their practice upon the path. Simply giving everyone mundane instruction is not always helpful, and simply giving everyone instruction regarding the pith can lead to deep misunderstandings and misapprehension of the practice. It is a challenge for any teacher to understand their audience and provide teachings of the appropriate format at the appropriate time.

Thank you for this. Fantastic.

Yes, thank you. Ven. Dune's words are profound.

[Aloka]

There is very little evidence the current Pali tradition is capable of establishing arahants... The tradition appears atrophied, save for the rare exception of the occasional inspiring teacher. I personally have zero political ambition, I merely want to help my niece and my wife with dhamma. I'm just working on what that really is... Vajrayana on the other hand produces them with regularity. My only problem with that is I prefer the feeling that I'm hearing the Buddha not someone millennia apart.

The "pith instructions" of Vajrayana and Dzogchen are very good at what they do. I've been looking into the suttas to find how Buddha might have said those same or similar things so I can refer to those instead of the pith instructions. If you look at what Ajahn Chah says,... these are pith instructions...

Are you a Vajrayana practitioner, suttametta ?

.....oh...I had missed this, so you obviously are :

My teachers tell me I'm enlightened already, and I ask about my notorious intemperance. HH Taklung Matul Rinpoche (who is a close friend) tells me its something like a scar. I do my best to fit in

What actual evidence do you have that Vajrayana produces arahants "with regularity" ?

.

[suttametta]

There is very little evidence the current Pali tradition is capable of establishing arahants... The tradition appears atrophied, save for the rare exception of the occasional inspiring teacher. I personally have zero political ambition, I merely want to help my niece and my wife with dhamma. I'm just working on what that really is... Vajrayana on the other hand produces them with regularity. My only problem with that is I prefer the feeling that I'm hearing the Buddha not someone millennia apart.

The "pith instructions" of Vajrayana and Dzogchen are very good at what they do. I've been looking into the suttas to find how Buddha might have said those same or similar things so I can refer to those instead of the pith instructions. If you look at what Ajahn Chah says,... these are pith instructions...

Are you a Vajrayana practitioner, suttametta ? What actual evidence do you have that Vajrayana produces arahants "with regularity" ?

.

I am. The traditions I studied would say "buddhas." In the Drikung Kagyu, for example, there is always one and his students are right up there. The evidence is seeing these guys. I don't agree with the interpretation of the bhumis that demotes arahants to a bhumi lower than buddha. I believe the Sakya rendition comports with mine.

[Aloka]

I am. The traditions I studied would say "buddhas." In the Drikung Kagyu, for example, there is always one and his students are right up there. I don't agree with the interpretation of the bhumis that demotes arahants to a bhumi lower than buddha. I believe the Sakya rendition comports with mine.

Yes I realise that you're expected to regard your teachers as "buddhas" as well as told all the past teachers of a lineage were enlightened.

[suttametta]

I am. The traditions I studied would say "buddhas." In the Drikung Kagyu, for example, there is always one and his students are right up there. I don't agree with the interpretation of the bhumis that demotes arahants to a bhumi lower than buddha. I believe the Sakya rendition comports with mine.

Yes I realise that you're expected to regard your teachers as "buddhas" as well as told all the past teachers of a lineage were enlightened.

I know you mean to say it doesn't mean they are. What I'm saying is if it walks like a duck... What I perceive is a lack of clear criteria and/or lack of rational criteria for evaluation and that leads to a sense of confusion about what level someone is at. I also perceive the negative side to deification and hyperbolization of the levels to make them seem completely impossible. I find this unproductive. I was not trained in the popular vajrayana. I wasn't trained from empowerment and visualizing a buddha field, etc. I was trained in the Mahamudra Upadesha and in Dzogchen in the path of direct introduction. So I wasn't trained to see my teacher as a buddha. I was led on in the Drikung Kagyu's retreat master system according to the second three year retreat known as the Mahamudra of the ten directions. What I'm saying that in TB, there are approaches with less complexity. Having said all that, I know my teachers have siddhis because I witnessed them. They don't have all the siddhis, but they all definitely have the unique buddhist siddhi of ultimate realization because that is exactly what the system does and they are perfect in that. You can see Pachung Rinpoche, Yeshe Rinpoche, Drubwang Rinpoche, Drubpon Rinchen Dorje and Drupon Gonpo Dorje, from another teacher is Garchen Rinpoche. No one will ever dispute these folks are not realized. Pachung had all the siddhis. I'm told the current retreat man in Drikung, Tenzen Nyima does also. I hope I get to meet him. Witnesses told me he only opens is window on special request; he never leaves it, and supposedly he smells like herbs, not bad smell. For what it's worth...

[Aloka]

I know you mean to say it doesn't mean they are. What I'm saying is if it walks like a duck... What I perceive is a lack of clear criteria and/or lack of rational criteria for evaluation and that leads to a sense of confusion about what level someone is at. I also perceive the negative side to deification and hyperbolization of the levels to make them seem completely impossible. I find this unproductive. I was not trained in the popular vajrayana. I wasn't trained from empowerment and visualizing a buddha field, etc. I was trained in the Mahamudra Upadesha and in Dzogchen in the path of direct introduction. So I wasn't trained to see my teacher as a buddha. I was led on in the Drikung Kagyu's retreat master system according to the second three year retreat known as the Mahamudra of the ten directions. What I'm saying that in TB, there are approaches with less complexity. Having said all that, I know my teachers have siddhis because I witnessed them. They don't have all the siddhis, but they all definitely have the unique buddhist siddhi of ultimate realization because that is exactly what the system does and they are perfect in that. You can see Pachung Rinpoche, Yeshe Rinpoche, Drubwang Rinpoche, Drubpon Rinchen Dorje and Drupon Gonpo Dorje, from another teacher is Garchen Rinpoche. No one will ever dispute these folks are not realized.

I'm familiar with Vajrayana because I practised it for many years and did Mahamudra courses as well as practices other than the mainstream ones. In fact at one time I was preparing to do a 3 year retreat but changed my mind because of some family problems which occured unexpectedly

I'n my experience there was a lot of encouragement right from the start to regard gurus with awe and often students imagined their every word and move was evidence of "siddhi "

Anyway....thanks for the chat, suttametta . Wishing you good heath and happiness.

[Boris]

. I take this to mean that when one claims something is absolutely true and other things are worthless, one is not respecting the truth unless one truly knows and sees that that something is absolutely true, i.e. they are at least a stream-winner who has known and see for themself. And even then, I doubt stream-winners would say such things that are sure to stir up conflict in others because such a one "delights in concord" (right speech).

I'm basing this off my interpretation of the Canki Sutta, MN 95.

You are mistaken, sotapanna does not know and see that Tathagata represent absolute Truth. He has only discovered some part of the truth and base on this experience his saddha is absolute, which is not exactly the same as your idea. This is a subtle mistake of yours. But if you suggest here, that because you are puthujjana you should be sceptical about Tathagata, that is a great mistake. Being student of Tathagata one of your task is to abtain 5 indiriyas, one of them is saddha. But you do not increase your saddha by being sceptical, that should be obvious for you.

About your idea what stream-winners would say what not, I don't want enter into disscussion since it is largely speculative and not quite connected with topic, but there are Suttas which very precisely describe what sotapanna cannot do, I belive you are able to find them*. But if by your remark you only suggest that I shuold keep quiet and do not "stir up conflict in others", well by telling the truth one cannot avoid, just has to stir up conflict in ignorants If they are intelligent, such stiring can be helpful.

*sorry for off topic:

I venture to think that if you actually read through the whole of the Vinaya and the Suttas you would be aghast at some of the things a real live sotāpanna is capable of. As a bhikkhu he is capable of suicide (but so also is an arahat—I have already quoted examples); he is capable of breaking all the lesser Vinaya rules (M. 48: i,323-5; A. III,85: i,231-2); he is capable of disrobing on account of sensual desires (e.g. the Ven. Citta Hatthisāriputta—A. VI,60: iii,392-9); he is capable (to some degree) of anger, ill-will, jealousy, stinginess, deceit, craftiness, shamelessness, and brazenness (A. II,16: i,96). As a layman he is capable (contrary to popular belief) of breaking any or all of the five precepts (though as soon as he has done so he recognizes his fault and repairs the breach, unlike the puthujjana who is content to leave the precepts broken).

There are some things in the Suttas that have so much shocked the Commentator that he has been obliged to provide patently false explanations (I am thinking in particular of the arahat's suicide in M. 144: iii,266 and in the Salāyatana Samy. 87: iv,55-60 and of a drunken sotāpanna in the Sotāpatti Samy. 24: v,375-7). What the sotāpannais absolutely incapable of doing is the following (M. 115: iii,64-5):—)

To take any determination (sankhāra) as permanent,
To take any determination as pleasant,
To take any thing (dhamma) as self,
To kill his mother,
To kill his father,
To kill an arahat,
Maliciously to shed a Buddha's blood,
To split the Sangha,
To follow any teacher other than the Buddha.

http://www.nanavira.org/index.php/lette ... 9-may-1963

[Boris]

Mention here Kalama Sutta in reality is more for outsiders then for Buddha students. Here is good example of "blind" faith, which after 7 days led from state of puthujjana to total awaking:

On the road between Rajagaha and Nalanda, the Master sat down under a fig tree, waiting for his future disciple. When Kassapa arrived at the spot and saw the radiance of the Buddha's countenance,[9] sensing the enlightenment that shone through it, he thought, "This must be my Master for whose sake I have gone forth!" He approached the Buddha, and paying homage, fell at his feet and exclaimed: "The Exalted One, Lord, is my teacher, and I am his disciple!"

http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/auth ... 5.html#ch4

[suttametta]

I know you mean to say it doesn't mean they are. What I'm saying is if it walks like a duck... What I perceive is a lack of clear criteria and/or lack of rational criteria for evaluation and that leads to a sense of confusion about what level someone is at. I also perceive the negative side to deification and hyperbolization of the levels to make them seem completely impossible. I find this unproductive. I was not trained in the popular vajrayana. I wasn't trained from empowerment and visualizing a buddha field, etc. I was trained in the Mahamudra Upadesha and in Dzogchen in the path of direct introduction. So I wasn't trained to see my teacher as a buddha. I was led on in the Drikung Kagyu's retreat master system according to the second three year retreat known as the Mahamudra of the ten directions. What I'm saying that in TB, there are approaches with less complexity. Having said all that, I know my teachers have siddhis because I witnessed them. They don't have all the siddhis, but they all definitely have the unique buddhist siddhi of ultimate realization because that is exactly what the system does and they are perfect in that. You can see Pachung Rinpoche, Yeshe Rinpoche, Drubwang Rinpoche, Drubpon Rinchen Dorje and Drupon Gonpo Dorje, from another teacher is Garchen Rinpoche. No one will ever dispute these folks are not realized.

I'm familiar with Vajrayana because I practised it for many years and did Mahamudra courses as well as practices other than the mainstream ones. In fact at one time I was preparing to do a 3 year retreat but changed my mind because of some family problems which occured unexpectedly

I'n my experience there was a lot of encouragement right from the start to regard gurus with awe and often students imagined their every word and move was evidence of "siddhi "

Anyway....thanks for the chat, suttametta . Wishing you good heath and happiness.

Yeah. Many people have this idea. My teacher and I are best friends. We eat lunch together at the cafe. We love each other like family. I am in awe of him anyway, because he is always reading my mind. Today without any delay he told me not to debate on religion forums when I have emotions or it will get out of control. I never mentioned I'm doing that...

[suttametta]

Mention here Kalama Sutta in reality is more for outsiders then for Buddha students. Here is good example of "blind" faith, which after 7 days led from state of puthujjana to total awaking:

On the road between Rajagaha and Nalanda, the Master sat down under a fig tree, waiting for his future disciple. When Kassapa arrived at the spot and saw the radiance of the Buddha's countenance,[9] sensing the enlightenment that shone through it, he thought, "This must be my Master for whose sake I have gone forth!" He approached the Buddha, and paying homage, fell at his feet and exclaimed: "The Exalted One, Lord, is my teacher, and I am his disciple!"

http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/auth ... 5.html#ch4

This is not a sign of awakening. A faith follower is the lowest level of a Buddha follower.

[Mkoll]

. I take this to mean that when one claims something is absolutely true and other things are worthless, one is not respecting the truth unless one truly knows and sees that that something is absolutely true, i.e. they are at least a stream-winner who has known and see for themself. And even then, I doubt stream-winners would say such things that are sure to stir up conflict in others because such a one "delights in concord" (right speech).

I'm basing this off my interpretation of the Canki Sutta, MN 95.

You are mistaken, sotapanna does not know and see that Tathagata represent absolute Truth. He has only discovered some part of the truth and base on this experience his saddha is absolute, which is not exactly the same as your idea. This is a subtle mistake of yours. But if you suggest here, that because you are puthujjana you should be sceptical about Tathagata, that is a great mistake. Being student of Tathagata one of your task is to abtain 5 indiriyas, one of them is saddha. But you do not increase your saddha by being sceptical, that should be obvious for you.

About your idea what stream-winners would say what not, I don't want enter into disscussion since it is largely speculative and not quite connected with topic, but there are Suttas which very precisely describe what sotapanna cannot do, I belive you are able to find them*. But if by your remark you only suggest that I shuold keep quiet and do not "stir up conflict in others", well by telling the truth one cannot avoid, just has to stir up conflict in ignorants If they are intelligent, such stiring can be helpful.

*sorry for off topic:

I have no idea where you could have possibly gotten the impression that I emphasized in the quote above. Clearly, we're on different wavelengths about this. We'll just have to agree to disagree; it's OT anyways.