Hi Green,
green wrote:non-Buddhists can try to do metta all they want and go hug the hugging ma and other wierd things-- they won't be able to succeed in practicing real metta.
I don't think this opinion is supported in the Suttas.
In the Assalāyana Sutta (MN. 93) the Buddha has the following exchange with an unconverted brahmin:
- “Although Master Gotama says this, still the brahmins think thus: ‘Brahmins are the highest caste, those of any other caste are inferior; brahmins are the fairest caste, those of any other caste are dark; only brahmins are purified, not non-brahmins; brahmins alone are the sons of Brahma, the offspring of Brahma, born of his mouth, born of Brahma, created by Brahma, heirs of Brahma.’”
“What do you think, Assalāyana? Is only a brahmin capable of developing a mind of loving-kindness towards a certain region, without hostility and without ill will, and not a noble, or a merchant, or a worker?”
“No, Master Gotama. Whether it be a noble, or a brahmin, or a merchant, or a worker — those of all four castes are capable of developing a mind of loving-kindness towards a certain region, without hostility and without ill will.”
“Then on the strength of what [argument] or with the support of what [authority] do the brahmins in this case say thus: ‘Brahmins are the highest caste, those of any other caste are inferior; brahmins are the fairest caste, those of any other caste are dark; only brahmins are purified, not non-brahmins; brahmins alone are the sons of Brahma, the offspring of Brahma, born of his mouth, born of Brahma, created by Brahma, heirs of Brahma’?”
Note that Assalāyana does not specify any religious affiliation for those who are capable of developing
mettā and nor does the Buddha contradict him.
And in the Cullasīhanāda Sutta (MN. 11) the Buddha says concerning outside teachers:
- “Bhikkhus, there are these four kinds of attachment. What four? Attachment to sensual pleasures, attachment to views, attachment to rules and observances, and attachment to a doctrine of self.
“Though certain recluses and brahmins claim to propound the full comprehension of all kinds of attachment, they do not completely describe the full comprehension of all kinds of attachment.
[...]
“They describe the full comprehension of attachment to sensual pleasures, attachment to views, attachment to precepts and vowed observances, but without describing the full comprehension of attachment to a doctrine of self. Why is that? Those good recluses and brahmins do not understand this last instance of attachment as it really is. Therefore, though they claim to propound the full comprehension of all kinds of attachment, they describe only the full comprehension of attachment to sensual pleasures, attachment to views, and attachment to precepts and vowed observances, without describing the full comprehension of attachment to a doctrine of self.”
So, the Buddha concedes that outside teachers may describe the full comprehension of attachment to sensual pleasures. In other words, they may lead their disciples to a comprehension of the gratification and peril in sense-pleasures and the advantage of renouncing them. This is the only kind of
paññā that is needed for success in
samatha-bhāvanā, of which
mettā-bhāvanā is one form.
Metta is radiation of good will through the Triple Gem,
Mettā is the wish for beings to be happy. It is merely a more exalted form of the wholesome mental factor of non-hate and has no necessary connection with the Triple Gem.
it is a love of all beings as no different from yourself.
Mettā can be devloped to that extent, after the stage called the "breaking of the barriers", but in its preliminary development its focus is only on the happiness of particular beings.
The Triple Gem makes one actualize the practice, without which one only pretends to practice metta -- only says the words, but does not know metta.
What actualizes the practice is not the Triple Gem, but rather, the repeated advertence to the proximate cause of
mettā, namely,
sattānaṃ manāpabhāva-dassana — the perception of what is lovable in living beings.
I remember trying to do metta without the Triple Gem -- it just didn't work.
Fair enough, but you over-generalize when you claim that your experience will be true for everyone.
Best wishes,
Dhammanando Bhikkhu