Why Meditate?

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
retrofuturist
Posts: 27848
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 9:52 pm
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Contact:

Re: Why Meditate?

Post by retrofuturist »

Greetings Tilt,
retrofuturist wrote:May your Tilt-fabricated-N8P cross you to the other shore!
tiltbillings wrote:My Tilt-fabricated-Buddha-Dhamma-N8P
Perhaps you could explain what you mean here.

Are you saying that you use the Buddha's Dhamma to construct your raft (exclusively? partially?) or are you claiming to be a.... :buddha2: ?

Why was it important to you, personally, to say that your path is Buddha-dhamma?

Speaking for myself, I'm perfectly comfortable to call my path a Retro-fabricated-N8P even though I regularly insist on building my path with Buddha-dhamma-brand materials. I wouldn't call my path itself Buddha-dhamma, unless I was a Buddha, which of course I'm not.

Metta,
Retro. :)
"Whatever is true, whatever is noble, whatever is right, whatever is pure, whatever is lovely, whatever is admirable—if anything is excellent or praiseworthy—think about such things."
User avatar
manas
Posts: 2678
Joined: Thu Jul 22, 2010 3:04 am
Location: Melbourne, Australia

Re: Why Meditate?

Post by manas »

retrofuturist wrote:
Speaking for myself, I'm perfectly comfortable to call my path a Retro-fabricated-N8P even though I regularly insist on building my path with Buddha-dhamma-brand materials. I wouldn't call my path itself Buddha-dhamma, unless I was a Buddha, which of course I'm not.
So it would appear that we all have to fabricate the Path for ourselves, out of five heaps, using an ancient instruction manual written in a foreign language...

:P
To the Buddha-refuge i go; to the Dhamma-refuge i go; to the Sangha-refuge i go.
Ron Crouch
Posts: 50
Joined: Thu May 17, 2012 4:32 pm

Re: Why Meditate?

Post by Ron Crouch »

Buckwheat wrote:
mikenz66 wrote:
retrofuturist wrote:Greetings Mike,

I have no hesitation whatsoever in agreeing with all your four points.

I think they're on the money, and the reason being is that they're all good advice on how to construct your path. They are all instances of the proverbial "grass, twigs, branches, & leaves" that can be "bound ... together to make a raft".
Wonderful. No more talk of "additions". :woohoo:

:anjali:
Mike
Just because I agree with Newton's theory of gravity doesn't make it Buddha-dhamma. It would still be Newton-dhamma.

My only problem with the dark night is that somebody on this thread gave me the impression that it is an unavoidable part of the Buddhist path, and a reason to tell people not to meditate. Buddha never discouraged anybody from meditating that I know of. Instead he offered a treed to meditate under. The dark night may or may not be a part of the human condition, but we can't blame that on the Buddhist path. If psychiatric patients are running into problems with meditation, it is because they are not getting the right grounding from a good teacher. Again, just my opinion.

Hey Buckwheat - I sure hope that it wasn't me that gave you that impression! Please check out my response to the question of whether or not the DN is inevitable:

"@mikenz66- regarding the question of whether the path inevitably leads to a dark night, the answer is, unfortunately, "it depends." The issue rests on the kind of meditation a person is doing. In classical buddhism there is a distinction made between "wet" and "dry" insight, which is the difference between the insight knowledges (nanas) experienced directly after deep concentration ("wet" = jhana) or without deep concentration ("dry" = no jhana). If you are doing it wet, then the dukkha nanas (dark night stages) seem like a breeze, a mild bit of turbulence in an otherwise smooth flight. If you are doing it dry however, then the dukkha nanas can really rock your world - and not in a good way. In the old texts and commentaries they divide it up into these two types as if they were all or nothing, but in truth almost everyone mixes it up and so the ambiguous answer of "it depends." Essentially, it depends on how deep your concentration is and how well you use it to move through the insight stages. So, while everyone will go through the insights into suffering in one form or another, how you experience it depends a lot on your concentration. Stronger concentration equals less difficulty."

If you are getting confused by what I'm saying about the DN, then please check out the research that Dr. Britton is doing on it in her lab at Brown, or listen to podcast interview on Buddhist Geeks: http://www.cheetahhouse.org/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Also - please don't think that I'm blaming buddhism for the dark night - I use that phrase deliberately to point out how it is a universal situation and not limited to any particular path. It is an important issue in all contemplative traditions. I would very much like to dissuade from the notion that people that are experiencing problems are all psychiatric patients. Nothing could be farther from the truth. The people I work with are some of the most successful and high-functioning people out there. It's a privilege to have their time and help them out.
User avatar
manas
Posts: 2678
Joined: Thu Jul 22, 2010 3:04 am
Location: Melbourne, Australia

Re: Why Meditate?

Post by manas »

Hi Ron,

I was wondering if you also train your students in the other aspects of the Noble Eightfold Path? Because afaik meditation isn't meant to be done in isolation, but rather as one (very important) part of a whole. Maybe alot of the inner drama experienced by some is the result of an imbalance, in the sense of too much meditation vs not enough dana, sila, noble companionship, and other things that provide the groundwork for later transformation?

:anjali:
To the Buddha-refuge i go; to the Dhamma-refuge i go; to the Sangha-refuge i go.
User avatar
mikenz66
Posts: 19941
Joined: Sat Jan 10, 2009 7:37 am
Location: Aotearoa, New Zealand

Re: Why Meditate?

Post by mikenz66 »

mikenz66 wrote:
retrofuturist wrote:
mikenz66 wrote: Wonderful. No more talk of "additions". :woohoo:
They're the additions to Buddha Dhamma that can be used to construct the path.

They don't need Buddha-dhamma TM stamped on them to make a good raft.

But similarly, if they're leaves, they're not branches. If they're branches, they're not grass etc. We don't call "branches" "grass", simply because they can both be used to build a raft, do we?

Out of interest, why is "additions" so problematic for you?
It's not in itself.

It's the suggestion that anyone has a path that is free of additions that is "pure Buddha-Dhamma".

I disagree with statements such as:
1. Venerable X teaches "Buddha-Dhamma", Venerable Y teaches "something else"; or
2. Practitioner A practices "Buddha-Dhamma", Practioner B practices "something else".

:anjali:
Mike
User avatar
mikenz66
Posts: 19941
Joined: Sat Jan 10, 2009 7:37 am
Location: Aotearoa, New Zealand

Re: Why Meditate?

Post by mikenz66 »

vinasp wrote: In AN Book of Fours, chapter XVII, there is a group of eight suttas which
explain the "four modes of progress".

1. The painful mode of progress with sluggish intuition.
2. The painful mode with swift intuition.
3. The pleasant mode of progress with sluggish intuition.
4. The pleasant mode with swift intuition. [AN 4.161]
Thanks Vincent. See:
http://www.metta.lk/tipitaka/2Sutta-Pit ... ggo-e.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

:anjali:
Mike
Ron Crouch
Posts: 50
Joined: Thu May 17, 2012 4:32 pm

Re: Why Meditate?

Post by Ron Crouch »

manas wrote:Hi Ron,

I was wondering if you also train your students in the other aspects of the Noble Eightfold Path? Because afaik meditation isn't meant to be done in isolation, but rather as one (very important) part of a whole. Maybe alot of the inner drama experienced by some is the result of an imbalance, in the sense of too much meditation vs not enough dana, sila, noble companionship, and other things that provide the groundwork for later transformation?

:anjali:

Sometimes I do, but it really occurs on a case-by-case basis. If someone's sila is off track, then they typically are not meditating regularly enough to even reach out to a teacher and commit to a serious practice. However, every once in a while a sila issue will interfere with progress and I'll work on that with students. Overall, people who want to work with a teacher are pretty good about "getting their act together" as I call it.

Even more important in terms of prep work for insight though, is concentration. I see some students who have literally never done a concentration practice, and so they are woefully prepared for the insight work. When that happens, we back up a step and focus on concentration first before starting insight. I also encourage all students to weave concentration into their insight work all along the path.

I think I understood your question, but might have got it wrong - does that help clarify your concern?

Manas, I'm sure you didn't mean it this way but let me say to any reader who might misinterpret the "off-balance" comment that the experience of dukkha nanas do not happen because a person is "off balance" or somehow messing up in other ways. This is part of the path. It's laid out very clearly in the Visuddhimagga and the Progress of Insight: http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/auth ... gress.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
User avatar
Ben
Posts: 18438
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2008 12:49 am
Location: kanamaluka

Re: Why Meditate?

Post by Ben »

Hi Ron,
As a matter of interest, what do you teach as a concentration practice, and how do you integrate it with vipassana?
Many thanks,

Ben
“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: [email protected]..
User avatar
retrofuturist
Posts: 27848
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 9:52 pm
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Contact:

Re: Why Meditate?

Post by retrofuturist »

Greetings Mike,
retrofuturist wrote:Out of interest, why is "additions" so problematic for you?
mikenz66 wrote:It's not in itself.

It's the suggestion that anyone has a path that is free of additions that is "pure Buddha-Dhamma".

I disagree with statements such as:
1. Venerable X teaches "Buddha-Dhamma", Venerable Y teaches "something else"; or
2. Practitioner A practices "Buddha-Dhamma", Practioner B practices "something else".
If that's what's problematic for you, then I'd suggest there's quite a simple way around what's troubling you...

In case 1, ask that Venerable X's so-called "Buddha-dhamma" be traced back in full to the discourses.
In case 2, remind Practitioner A that the Noble Eightfold Path is fabricated, so you can't practice "Buddha-dhamma" in isolation from personal fabrication. Thus, their path is "something else" too.

It's possible to do both those things without attachment and without inferring inferiority/superiority.

It's just using the Buddha's teachings to demonstrate the hypothetical speakers of case 1 & case 2 that their representations are not accurate vis-a-vis the Buddha's teachings.

Metta,
Retro. :)
"Whatever is true, whatever is noble, whatever is right, whatever is pure, whatever is lovely, whatever is admirable—if anything is excellent or praiseworthy—think about such things."
User avatar
Dan74
Posts: 4529
Joined: Sun Mar 01, 2009 11:12 pm
Location: Switzerland

Re: Why Meditate?

Post by Dan74 »

So I guess we can call "Buddhism" only that which is traceable in full to the sutta and vinaya pitaka?

Some renaming may be in order, but it's not hard:

instead of Theravada Buddhism - Theravadism
instead of Mahayana Buddhism - Mahayanism
instead of Zen Buddhism - Zen Mahayanism

Frankly, this redefining wouldn't bother me in the least, but I kind of think we have enough isms already, don't you?
_/|\_
User avatar
Polar Bear
Posts: 1348
Joined: Mon Apr 16, 2012 7:39 am

Re: Why Meditate?

Post by Polar Bear »

Dan74 wrote:So I guess we can call "Buddhism" only that which is traceable in full to the sutta and vinaya pitaka?

Some renaming may be in order, but it's not hard:

instead of Theravada Buddhism - Theravadism
instead of Mahayana Buddhism - Mahayanism
instead of Zen Buddhism - Zen Mahayanism

Frankly, this redefining wouldn't bother me in the least, but I kind of think we have enough isms already, don't you?
I think he was saying something more like:

There is Buddhism and then there is Buddha-dhamma

Theravada, Mahayana, and Zen are all adjectives that indicate a modification/interpretation or additions to Buddha-dhamma that makes each of these schools Buddh- isms instead of Buddha-dhamma and names such as Theravada and Mahayana indicate the specific origination of these modifications/interpretations of Buddha-dhamma
"I don't envision a single thing that, when developed & cultivated, leads to such great benefit as the mind. The mind, when developed & cultivated, leads to great benefit."

"I don't envision a single thing that, when undeveloped & uncultivated, brings about such suffering & stress as the mind. The mind, when undeveloped & uncultivated, brings about suffering & stress."
User avatar
retrofuturist
Posts: 27848
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 9:52 pm
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Contact:

Re: Why Meditate?

Post by retrofuturist »

Greetings Dan & Polarbuddha101,
Dan74 wrote:So I guess we can call "Buddhism" only that which is traceable in full to the sutta and vinaya pitaka?
Dan ~ No. The word "Buddhism" wasn't invented until centuries after the Buddha's parinibbana. He left no instructions for how this "Buddhism" should be regarded, nor even that such an "ism" be created.

Polarbuddha101 ~ :goodpost: . As Oscar Wilde wrote in, The Ideal Husband - "Let us call things by their proper names. It makes matters simpler."

Metta,
Retro. :)
"Whatever is true, whatever is noble, whatever is right, whatever is pure, whatever is lovely, whatever is admirable—if anything is excellent or praiseworthy—think about such things."
User avatar
Dan74
Posts: 4529
Joined: Sun Mar 01, 2009 11:12 pm
Location: Switzerland

Re: Why Meditate?

Post by Dan74 »

OK, so then saying something is not Buddha-dhamma means it is not recorded as having been said in sutta / vinaya?

The point being...?

Unless the attribution to sutta / vinaya is given I assume that it doesn't come from it. Doesn't everyone else?

To my mind, the more meaningful question is whether or not it is in line with what is in sutta / vinaya? Does it lead to liberation or further into bondage?

If the former, then it is the Dhamma that liberates (Buddha-dhamma?, Bodhi-dhamma?, Bodhidharma? :) )
_/|\_
User avatar
tiltbillings
Posts: 23046
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2008 9:25 am

Re: Why Meditate?

Post by tiltbillings »

manas wrote:
retrofuturist wrote:
Speaking for myself, I'm perfectly comfortable to call my path a Retro-fabricated-N8P even though I regularly insist on building my path with Buddha-dhamma-brand materials. I wouldn't call my path itself Buddha-dhamma, unless I was a Buddha, which of course I'm not.
So it would appear that we all have to fabricate the Path for ourselves, out of five heaps, using an ancient instruction manual written in a foreign language...
And in the context of a foreign culture long dead. And in addition to that the "instruction manual" shows signs of handling and editing reflecting at least four broad groups of monastics preserving the texts in question in somewhat differing emphasis. And add to that there are other versions of the "instruction manual" that also show handling and editing.
retrofuturist wrote:Why was it important to you, personally, to say that your path is Buddha-dhamma?
One of the ongoing problems here is the limited understanding of "Buddha-Dhamma." There is Buddha-Dhamma in terms of Buddha-sāsana (Buddha-Message) or Buddha-vācāna (Buddha-Speech/Words), which is the suttas, and there is Buddha-Dhamma, the Buddha-Truth, which ideally is what is contained within the suttas. As I said, it quite possible to speak about impermanence in ways that accord with the Buddha-Dhamma, the Truth the Buddha taught without quoting his words, the Buddha-sāsana/Buddha-vācāna.

It is quite possible to quote the Buddha-sāsana and explain the text without deviating from the Buddha-Dhamma, the Truth the Buddha taught, but, of course, who determines if the explanation does, in fact, deviate from the Truth of the Buddha, which, of course, suggests that one actually knows what that is. I don’t think Buddhaghosa, the Voice of the Buddha, ever characterized the Visuddhimagga as Buddha-Dhamma as understood as Buddha-vācāna (Buddha-Speech/Words), but I am sure he most sincerely felt that he was faithfully explicating the Buddha-vācāna (Buddha-Speech/Words), giving us Buddha-Dhamma, the Truth of the Buddha.

But as we have seen on this forum, even very basic sutta teachings can bring about significant disagreements. I have been amused to have been, at times, lectured on the correct understanding of the Pali of a text by someone who has not a clue about the language and how it works. And, as another example,we have seen noting as a practice severely criticized here as not being in accordance with the Buddha’s teachings because it is not mentioned in the suttas. Not mentioned in the suttas it is not in accord with the Buddha-Dhamma, so to hell with it. All too easy to get lost in an unquestioning adherence to the letter, completely missing the spirit.

The question is, who gets to determine (and how) what is and is not in accordance with the Buddha’s teachings?

So, “Why was it important to you, personally, to say that your path is Buddha-dhamma?” If it is not Buddha-Dhamma, what is it? (Of course, I am not advocating an “everything goes” version of the Dhamma.) What I do and understand is grounded in 40+ years of practice and study of the suttas with help along the way from Vens Buddhaghosa, Nyanaponika, Nananda, Joseph Goldstein, Munindraji and many others. While it is easy to point to sometimes significant variations among these teachers, I cannot get overly exercised over that given that some very fundamental things carry across the supposed differences. After all the study and practice I have come to one useful realization, which I do not have to have every bit of the Dhamma absolutely figured out, as if that were possible. I need enough to do the practice, and the Dhamma of the Buddha is resilient enough to accommodate the much of the differences. What I practice is Buddha-Dhamma as I understand it.
>> 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
Ben
Posts: 18438
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2008 12:49 am
Location: kanamaluka

Re: Why Meditate?

Post by Ben »

Well said, Tilt!
“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: [email protected]..
Post Reply