Ingram, et al - "Hard Core Dharma" & claims of attainment

An open and inclusive investigation into Buddhism and spiritual cultivation

Re: Ingram, et al - "Hard Core Dharma" & claims of attainment

Postby Khalil Bodhi » Fri Aug 05, 2011 4:45 pm

Sadhu!
To avoid all evil, to cultivate good, and to cleanse one's mind — this is the teaching of the Buddhas.
-Dhp. 183

Uposatha Observance Club:http://www.facebook.com/group.php?gid=148031379279&v=info
Kiva-Theravada Buddhists:http://www.kiva.org/team/theravada_buddhists
Dana on the Interwebs:
http://greatergood.com
http://freerice.com
User avatar
Khalil Bodhi
 
Posts: 1647
Joined: Tue Feb 03, 2009 6:32 pm
Location: NYC

Re: Ingram, et al - "Hard Core Dharma" & claims of attainment

Postby Prasadachitta » Sat Aug 06, 2011 2:47 pm

darods wrote:
I causes me sadness to think of people who fall into a situation whereby they consider themselves to achieved something and in doing so distract themselves from continued striving. I hope they get back on track!


Hi Dardos,

Certainly we all will benefit from more right effort. It is my opinion that what you are concerned about is a ubiquitous distraction throughout the field of spiritual practice. I am not a fan of Ingram and have not read his work other than a few excerpts. However it seems in your post that you have in some way benefited from your exposure to him. I think we should always be reassessing our approach to practice in the light of a perfect goal. To whatever degree that we diminish our perception of the loftiness of the goal I think we will also undermine our ability to strive. Even so, I think our practice of right effort must include a consistent awareness (at least intuitively) of how this imperfect manifestation of will (thats us) can move towards and support the arising of that perfection in real time right now. It seems Ingram is trying to put practitioners into this kind of relationship with the goal however misguided. My opinion is that there is probably enough Dhamma being expressed that people under his influence can continue to reassess their approach effectively enough to continue developing. I could be wrong so lets all continue to engage with a kind hearted but uncompromising critique of what the Dhamma is so that we can all understand it more deeply.


Metta

Prasadachitta
"Beautifully taught is the Lord's Dhamma, immediately apparent, timeless, of the nature of a personal invitation, progressive, to be attained by the wise, each for himself." Anguttara Nikaya V.332
User avatar
Prasadachitta
 
Posts: 974
Joined: Sat Jan 10, 2009 6:52 am
Location: San Francisco (The Mission) Ca USA

Re: Ingram, et al - "Hard Core Dharma" & claims of attainment

Postby gnulnx » Sun Nov 27, 2011 5:07 pm

Will my comment add to the peace or decrease the peace?

I debated this for a while before I decided to register and then respond.
Ultimately I decided to post not because I have special insight into what
Ingram is or is not. I decided to post because I think this thread appears to
provide an open book to the thoughts of many of the posters.

In short this thread makes me sad. The delusion and dogma appear to be quite steep
with some members. Is this a Buddhist forum were the members make constant strides to
be aware of every passing thought or is this a random religious forum focused on dogmatic
detail to scripture? Is Ingrams book any more contradictory than the whole of Zen?

Can any of you honestly find fault with Ingrams teaching on meditation?
His chapter on correct meditation are about as concise and accurate as any I've as of yet found.
Is it possible that the only real issue you have with him is a claim he made?
Claiming something that a part of you obviously considers taboo?
Ponder this in it's entirety. Don't focus on whether he is an Arahat or not.
Focus on that part of you that is reacting to some part of Ingram?
What is it about him that causes your mind to push back in such away?

Lastly, what would you require of a person as proof of their enlightenment?
Are you sure it's even possible for a human to meet that definition?

When the student is ready the teacher will appear.
I appears that often times we become so focused on the inaccuracies of another
persons teaching that we fail to realize the real lesson was to found in the observation of our own aversion.

Peace.
gnulnx
 
Posts: 1
Joined: Sun Nov 27, 2011 4:43 pm

Re: Ingram, et al - "Hard Core Dharma" & claims of attainment

Postby m0rl0ck » Sun Nov 27, 2011 6:31 pm

gnulnx wrote: I think this thread appears to
provide an open book to the thoughts of many of the posters.



I have to agree with you there. This thread has provided an on and off bit of amusmement to me every time it pops up in the active topics. A lot of people seem to interested in judging others. Just human nature i guess. Doesnt "mind your own business and dont be judgemental" appear anywhere in the scriptures? Anybody got a cite for that?
"When you meditate, don't send your mind outside. Don't fasten onto any knowledge at all. Whatever knowledge you've gained from books or teachers, don't bring it in to complicate things. Cut away all preoccupations, and then as you meditate let all your knowledge come from what's going on in the mind. When the mind is quiet, you'll know it for yourself. But you have to keep meditating a lot. When the time comes for things to develop, they'll develop on their own. Whatever you know, have it come from your own mind.
http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/thai ... eleft.html
User avatar
m0rl0ck
 
Posts: 1051
Joined: Fri Jan 30, 2009 10:51 am

Re: Ingram, et al - "Hard Core Dharma" & claims of attainment

Postby cooran » Sun Nov 27, 2011 6:52 pm

Hello Morlock,

One reference:

‘’Therefore, Ananda, you should not be a hasty critic of people, should not lightly pass judgement on people. One who passes judgement on people harms himself. I alone, Ananda, or one like me, can judge people.’’
………
‘’Such judgement, indeed, will for a long time cause harm and suffering to those critics.’’

From AN 6.44

with metta
Chris
---The trouble is that you think you have time---
---Worry is the Interest, paid in advance, on a debt you may never owe---
---It's not what happens to you in life that is important ~ it's what you do with it ---
User avatar
cooran
 
Posts: 7799
Joined: Tue Jan 06, 2009 11:32 pm
Location: Queensland, Australia

Re: Ingram, et al - "Hard Core Dharma" & claims of attainment

Postby David N. Snyder » Sun Nov 27, 2011 7:51 pm

cooran wrote:‘’Therefore, Ananda, you should not be a hasty critic of people, should not lightly pass judgement on people. One who passes judgement on people harms himself. I alone, Ananda, or one like me, can judge people.’’
………
‘’Such judgement, indeed, will for a long time cause harm and suffering to those critics.’’

From AN 6.44


Good quotes. Also this famous one:

"Let not one look to the faults of others, to what they have done or failed to do. Rather, look to what you have done or failed to do." (Dhp.50)

But on the other hand . . .

The Buddha did specify rules for monks and nuns to follow and precepts for lay people to follow and they were rebuked and removed from the robes for certain offenses. He also set up the Great Standards for judging what is Dhamma and what is not. (Vinaya, Mv.VI. 40)

It is true that the Buddha never slandered or abused anyone. He was completely free from jealousy and ill-will. However, he certainly did say some things that were displeasing to others. When he started teaching the Dhamma, the Brahmins were well-established as the “Church” of the day. They held that the Brahmins or priests were a superior caste to workers, farmers, merchants, and nobles. The Buddha ridiculed them in many ways, both in private with his loyal disciples and in public when non-believers were present. They lost most of their support, and conspired to discredit the Buddha by hiring a prostitute to pretend she had had an affair with him, then hiring some thugs to murder her.

The Buddha also criticised evil-doers among his own followers and constantly admonished his loyal disciples not to be heedless. He said, “Ānanda, I will not treat you [gently] as a potter treats an unbaked pot. I will instruct and admonish you repeatedly [robustly if necessary]. The sound core will stand the test.”
http://www.aimwell.org/Forums/forums.html
User avatar
David N. Snyder
Site Admin
 
Posts: 8288
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 4:15 am
Location: Las Vegas, Nevada

Re: Ingram, et al - "Hard Core Dharma" & claims of attainment

Postby tiltbillings » Mon Nov 28, 2011 1:53 am

So, taking exception to Ingram's claims and teachings as they seriously deviate from the teachings of the suttas and the tradition is an inappropriate act of judgment?
This being is bound to samsara, kamma is his means for going beyond.
SN I, 38.

Ar scáth a chéile a mhaireas na daoine.
People live in one another’s shelter.

dheamhan a fhios agam

"We eat cold eels and think distant thoughts." -- Jack Johnson
User avatar
tiltbillings
 
Posts: 20085
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2008 9:25 am

Re: Ingram, et al - "Hard Core Dharma" & claims of attainmen

Postby tiltbillings » Mon Nov 28, 2011 7:44 am

gnulnx wrote: Will my comment add to the peace or decrease the peace?
Given the rather unskilful approach taken here, your comments probably do not help.

I decided to post because I think this thread appears to
provide an open book to the thoughts of many of the posters.
In short this thread makes me sad. The delusion and dogma appear to be quite steep with some members. Is this a Buddhist forum were the members make constant strides to be aware of every passing thought or is this a random religious forum focused on dogmatic detail to scripture? Is Ingrams book any more contradictory than the whole of Zen?
First of all, Zen has nothing to do with the issue at hand, but if someone grossly misrepresented Zen, is it delusion and dogmatic to offer a critique of the misrepresentation? So if someone's critical analysis of Ingram’s claims, claims which run counter to the very core texts of the tradition of this forum, then offering a critique is to be delusional and dogmatic, so it seems. Now, that characterization could, with equal justification, be seen as equally problematic as the critique of Ingram’s claims.

Also, what is being stated by gnulnx, so it seems, is that offering a critique of Ingram’s claim means that those making the critique are not good Buddhists, that they are not really doing the practice, but are, rather, just deluded and dogmatic. I wonder how that adds to the peace?

Can any of you honestly find fault with Ingrams teaching on meditation? His chapter on correct meditation are about as concise and accurate as any I've as of yet found.
That is your opinion; however, the question is taking the whole picture of what Ingram is offering into consideration; there are better options.

Is it possible that the only real issue you have with him is a claim he made? Claiming something that a part of you obviously considers taboo? Ponder this in it's entirety. Don't focus on whether he is an Arahat or not. Focus on that part of you that is reacting to some part of Ingram? What is it about him that causes your mind to push back in such away?
So, in other words, if a person has a problem with Ingram, the problem is with that person, not the fact that Ingram has distorted the Buddha’s teachings and that Ingram's claims of being an arahant run counter to the words of the Buddha.

This is an interesting form of an ad hominem: you disagree with Ingram because something is wrong with you. Not really a very helpful response.

Lastly, what would you require of a person as proof of their enlightenment? Are you sure it's even possible for a human to meet that definition?
Then why would Ingram make such a claim about himself? Since he has, all by himself, put that claim out there, it is open for discussion (why wouldn’t it be?), and since he is using a Buddhist category –arahant – in his claim of “enlightenment” that is also not at all unreasonably open for discussion. And disagreeing with Ingram does not all by itself mean that whomever disagrees with his claim is delusional or dogmatic. There is no justification for such a claim as that.

I[sic] appears that often times we become so focused on the inaccuracies of another persons teaching that we fail to realize the real lesson was to found in the observation of our own aversion.
Looking at the failure of another’s teaching does mean that those who are doing the looking are full of aversion. It might mean quite the contrary – a very deep concern for the welfare of others and wanting the Dhamma to be carefully and skilfully presented in a way that does not bring shame to it.
This being is bound to samsara, kamma is his means for going beyond.
SN I, 38.

Ar scáth a chéile a mhaireas na daoine.
People live in one another’s shelter.

dheamhan a fhios agam

"We eat cold eels and think distant thoughts." -- Jack Johnson
User avatar
tiltbillings
 
Posts: 20085
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2008 9:25 am

Re: Ingram, et al - "Hard Core Dharma" & claims of attainment

Postby Ben » Mon Nov 28, 2011 8:42 am

Well said, Tilt!
Learn this from the waters:
in mountain clefts and chasms,
loud gush the streamlets,
but great rivers flow silently.

Taṃ nadīhi vijānātha:
sobbhesu padaresu ca,
saṇantā yanti kusobbhā,
tuṇhīyanti mahodadhī.

Sutta Nipata 3.725

Compassionate Hands Foundation (Buddhist aid in Myanmar) • Buddhist Global ReliefUNHCR
Buddhist Life Stories of Australia
e: ben.dhammawheel@gmail.com
User avatar
Ben
Site Admin
 
Posts: 16346
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2008 12:49 am
Location: Land of the sleeping gods

Re: Ingram, et al - "Hard Core Dharma" & claims of attainment

Postby David N. Snyder » Mon Nov 28, 2011 5:26 pm

tiltbillings wrote:Looking at the failure of another’s teaching doesn't mean that those who are doing the looking are full of aversion. It might mean quite the contrary – a very deep concern for the welfare of others and wanting the Dhamma to be carefully and skilfully presented in a way that does not bring shame to it.


:thumbsup: Yes, well said.
User avatar
David N. Snyder
Site Admin
 
Posts: 8288
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 4:15 am
Location: Las Vegas, Nevada

Re: Ingram, et al - "Hard Core Dharma" & claims of attainment

Postby Jaidyn » Mon Nov 28, 2011 9:25 pm

Interesting, but is he trying too much to be "hardcore"? Loses my respect if I am to judge by written words.

Oh, yes, a brief warning. I should mention that I am hardcore, into hardcore practice, into very hard-hitting dharma, and sometimes I let it out with both barrels. [...] I expect people to be self-reliant to a high degree, and projections both negative and positive tend to piss me off. I probably should be more understanding, but clearly at times am not. If it happens with you and you are sure nothing good came of it, my apologies, but at least you were warned.

http://www.interactivebuddha.com/contact.shtml

(text made bold & red by me)

The last time I heard the words "piss me off" was when Gordon Ramsay used them.

Maybe he is trying cerate trust by acting in opposition to the stereotype of the arahat (as we all know stereotypes tend to be wrong to a significant degree), but I think he is failing here, and it seems more like a cheap trick.

Hmmm, I suddenly lost my interest in Ingram. I was about to skim his book.
User avatar
Jaidyn
 
Posts: 144
Joined: Wed Aug 24, 2011 6:47 am

Re: Ingram, et al - "Hard Core Dharma" & claims of attainmen

Postby bluebuddha » Wed Feb 26, 2014 9:48 pm

I was looking around at several forums to find out more information about Daniel Ingrams book "Mastering The Core Teachings of The Buddha" and see what others had to say about Mr Ingram and his book.

Looks like I came to the right place.

I am glad to read what other people have to say about all this.

I wont pass judgement on Mr Ingram or his book or judge what others have to say either.

But I am happy to read all the comments.

I do want to say "Thank You" to all those who have posted to this thread, for I have found it "enlightening"

Thanks also to the Dhamma Wheel forum for having the courage to let this thread take its course.
The non-doing of any evil,
the performance of what's skillful,
the cleansing of one's own mind:
this is the teaching of the Awakened.
User avatar
bluebuddha
 
Posts: 2
Joined: Tue Feb 25, 2014 10:35 pm

Re: Ingram, et al - "Hard Core Dharma" & claims of attainmen

Postby Denisa » Wed May 28, 2014 4:36 pm

Found the below quoted section (page 24) under the heading "Spiritual Pilgrimage and Gurudom" (page 21) from the scribd book mentioned in this post (viewtopic.php?f=16&t=2698&start=160#p249775). Unbelievable. Ingram thinks him self as an arahant and still thinks he can do such things.

"An example of an extreme case is Daniel M. Ingram, an American student of Sayādaw U Paṇdita of Myanmar. Daniel M.
Ingram claimed himself to be a diehard follower of Mahāsi method and a non-returner. He also had been authorized and
encouraged to teach Mahāsi method by his teachers. In his book titled Mastering the Core Teachings of the Buddha, he states
on page 237 that non-returners and arahants are quite capable of doing such things as sleeping with prostitutes, smoking
crack, cheating on their partners, or even killing beings, regardless of the traditional belief that they have completely
eliminated greed, lust, and anger. Also on page 239, he states that it is an utter nonsense of the text to state that arahants
cannot have orgasms."


EDIT: page #
Last edited by Denisa on Thu May 29, 2014 5:05 am, edited 1 time in total.
Denisa
 
Posts: 147
Joined: Thu May 15, 2014 1:57 am

Re: Ingram, et al - "Hard Core Dharma" & claims of attainmen

Postby waterchan » Wed May 28, 2014 6:02 pm

...Daniel M. Ingram, an American student of Sayādaw U Paṇdita of Myanmar...

He also had been authorized and encouraged to teach Mahāsi method by his teachers.


I strongly doubt the authenticity of both credentials. You can technically call yourself a student of Sayadaw Whoever if you've taken a class or two under him. And I highly doubt that Mahasi Sayadaw himself would have approved of Mr. Ingram as a teacher of the Mahasi method.
quidquid Latine dictum sit altum videtur
(Anything in Latin sounds profound.)
User avatar
waterchan
 
Posts: 471
Joined: Fri May 07, 2010 7:17 pm
Location: Sereitei

Re: Ingram, et al - "Hard Core Dharma" & claims of attainmen

Postby Mkoll » Wed May 28, 2014 7:07 pm

waterchan wrote:
...Daniel M. Ingram, an American student of Sayādaw U Paṇdita of Myanmar...

He also had been authorized and encouraged to teach Mahāsi method by his teachers.


I strongly doubt the authenticity of both credentials. You can technically call yourself a student of Sayadaw Whoever if you've taken a class or two under him. And I highly doubt that Mahasi Sayadaw himself would have approved of Mr. Ingram as a teacher of the Mahasi method.

I could see it being true. Maybe he was more "normal" back then. Then he got the endorsement. And some time later, well . . . look at this thread! :jumping:
Peace,
James
User avatar
Mkoll
 
Posts: 4151
Joined: Wed Dec 05, 2012 6:55 pm
Location: California, USA

Re: Ingram, et al - "Hard Core Dharma" & claims of attainmen

Postby waterchan » Wed May 28, 2014 7:17 pm

Mkoll wrote:I could see it being true. Maybe he was more "normal" back then. Then he got the endorsement. And some time later, well . . . look at this thread! :jumping:

I dunno... I can imagine such a person losing faith in the Dhamma and completely abandoning it, but to fall so hard as to begin flagrantly distorting the core teachings of Buddhism? I don't think anyone can fall THAT hard.

I mean sure, stream winning is the only true point of no return, but still...
quidquid Latine dictum sit altum videtur
(Anything in Latin sounds profound.)
User avatar
waterchan
 
Posts: 471
Joined: Fri May 07, 2010 7:17 pm
Location: Sereitei

Re: Ingram, et al - "Hard Core Dharma" & claims of attainmen

Postby Modus.Ponens » Wed May 28, 2014 7:38 pm

Denisa wrote:Found the below quoted section under the heading "Spiritual Pilgrimage and Gurudom" (page 21) from the scribd book mentioned in this post (http://dhammawheel.com/viewtopic.php?f= ... 60#p249775). Unbelievable. Ingram thinks him self as an arahant and still thinks he can do such things.

"An example of an extreme case is Daniel M. Ingram, an American student of Sayādaw U Paṇdita of Myanmar. Daniel M.
Ingram claimed himself to be a diehard follower of Mahāsi method and a non-returner. He also had been authorized and
encouraged to teach Mahāsi method by his teachers. In his book titled Mastering the Core Teachings of the Buddha, he states
on page 237 that non-returners and arahants are quite capable of doing such things as sleeping with prostitutes, smoking
crack, cheating on their partners, or even killing beings, regardless of the traditional belief that they have completely
eliminated greed, lust, and anger. Also on page 239, he states that it is an utter nonsense of the text to state that arahants
cannot have orgasms."


This, quoted out of context, is terrible. I have Daniel Ingram's book in PDF format. I used the search function to find the word "crack" and didn't find it used in any way as sugested above. Nor did I find "prostitute".

I don't have a solid opinion on wether Ingram is an arahat or not. But can we please analyse his words without impulsive reaction? If he is in fact an arahat, do you realise how much ill will is being turned against him? I've said it before: in my interpretation _ and I might be wrong _ what Ingram means is what Dipa Ma also meant to say. A non-returner can have the sensation associated with anger, but it just "doesn't burn". Meaning that when the sensation correspondent to anger arises in the non-returner, because he knows in his bones that it is impermanent, unsatisfactory and devoid of essence, no suffering arises in his mind.

If this is what Ingram is saying, not only it is a possible interpretation of the dhamma, as it's one that makes perfect sense to me. We have already established, in a previous thread, that the suttas suport the view that arahats experience unpleasant srensations resulting from mind contact. What they don't experience is suffering. So, in light of this, I find this interpretation perfectly reasonable. As with anger, so with orgasms.

Regarding moral behaviour, again, let's give a chance to the words and see if they make sense. Is it literaly absolutely impossible for an arahat to kill? The suttas say that an arahat "is incapable of killing". I'm sure that it is possible that the thought of killing another person arises in the arahat's mind. And I think he could carry out the killing, if he so decided. It just happens he doesn't ever decide that. There's no written record, as far as I know, of an arahat killing another human being. But the Buddha, for example, said that the only beings who could take their own lives blamelessly were the arahats. That makes an interesting "contradiction". Aproval of suicide, with the result of suicide, is an offense that entails expulsion from the monastic order. Plus, killing an arahat is one of the only 5 actions which guarantees hell in the next life. Yet, the Buddha, who was an arahat, "aproved" of suicide of arahats. It gets complicated, doesn't it?

The problem, I think, is with absolute statements. Taking the words of the Buddha as absolute statements is not a good thing to do, imo. And, giving a chance to Ingram's words, if what he's trying to convey is that this "it is absolutely impossible for an arahat to kill" statement should not be taken as absolutely flawless, then I would agree to some extent.
And the Blessed One addressed the bhikkhus, saying: "Behold now, bhikkhus, I exhort you: All compounded things are subject to vanish. Strive with earnestness!"
User avatar
Modus.Ponens
 
Posts: 2142
Joined: Sat Jan 03, 2009 2:38 am
Location: Gallifrey

Re: Ingram, et al - "Hard Core Dharma" & claims of attainmen

Postby Mkoll » Wed May 28, 2014 7:48 pm

waterchan wrote:
Mkoll wrote:I could see it being true. Maybe he was more "normal" back then. Then he got the endorsement. And some time later, well . . . look at this thread! :jumping:

I dunno... I can imagine such a person losing faith in the Dhamma and completely abandoning it, but to fall so hard as to begin flagrantly distorting the core teachings of Buddhism? I don't think anyone can fall THAT hard.

I mean sure, stream winning is the only true point of no return, but still...

I resort to the oft-used saying: power tends to corrupt . . .
Peace,
James
User avatar
Mkoll
 
Posts: 4151
Joined: Wed Dec 05, 2012 6:55 pm
Location: California, USA

Re: Ingram, et al - "Hard Core Dharma" & claims of attainmen

Postby Mkoll » Wed May 28, 2014 7:55 pm

Modus,

Orgasms are a form of sensual pleasure, specifically the "tactile" cord of the five cords of sensual pleasure. Would you agree with that?

If so, then please see the first part of MN 22. Here, the Buddha severely rebukes a monk, Arittha, for misrepresenting his teachings on sensual pleasures. I don't think I've come across such severe words by the Buddha in any other sutta.

Do you see what I'm trying to point out here?

I have heard that on one occasion the Blessed One was staying in Savatthi, at Jeta's Grove, Anathapindika's park. Now on that occasion this pernicious viewpoint (ditthigata) had arisen in the monk Arittha Formerly-of-the-Vulture-Killers: "As I understand the Dhamma taught by the Blessed One, those acts the Blessed One says are obstructive, when indulged in, are not genuine obstructions." A large number of monks heard, "They say that this pernicious viewpoint has arisen in the monk Arittha Formerly-of-the-Vulture-Killers: 'As I understand the Dhamma taught by the Blessed One, those acts the Blessed One says are obstructive, when indulged in, are not genuine obstructions.'" So they went to the monk Arittha Formerly-of-the-Vulture-Killers and on arrival said to him, "Is it true, friend Arittha, that this pernicious viewpoint has arisen in you — 'As I understand the Dhamma taught by the Blessed One, those acts the Blessed One says are obstructive, when indulged in, are not genuine obstructions'?"

"Yes, indeed, friends. I understand the Dhamma taught by the Blessed One, and those acts the Blessed One says are obstructive, when indulged in are not genuine obstructions."

Then those monks, desiring to pry the monk Arittha Formerly-of-the-Vulture-Killers away from that pernicious viewpoint, quizzed him back and forth and rebuked him, saying, "Don't say that, friend Arittha. Don't misrepresent the Blessed One, for it is not good to misrepresent the Blessed One. The Blessed One would not say anything like that. In many ways, friend, the Blessed One has described obstructive acts, and when indulged in they are genuine obstructions. The Blessed One has said that sensual pleasures are of little satisfaction, much stress, much despair, & greater drawbacks. The Blessed One has compared sensual pleasures to a chain of bones: of much stress, much despair, & greater drawbacks. The Blessed One has compared sensual pleasures to a lump of flesh... a grass torch... a pit of glowing embers... a dream... borrowed goods... the fruits of a tree... a butcher's ax and chopping block... swords and spears... a snake's head: of much stress, much despair, & greater drawbacks." [1] And yet even though he was quizzed back & forth and rebuked by those monks, the monk Arittha Formerly-of-the-Vulture-Killers, through stubbornness and attachment to that very same pernicious viewpoint, continued to insist, "Yes, indeed, friends. I understand the Dhamma taught by the Blessed One, and those acts the Blessed One says are obstructive, when indulged in are not genuine obstructions."

So when the monks were unable to pry the monk Arittha Formerly-of-the-Vulture-Killers away from that pernicious viewpoint, they went to the Blessed One and on arrival, having bowed down to him, sat to one side. As they were sitting there, they [told him what had happened.]

So the Blessed One told a certain monk, "Come, monk. In my name, call the monk Arittha Formerly-of-the-Vulture-Killers, saying, 'The Teacher calls you, friend Arittha.'"

"As you say, lord," the monk answered and, having gone to the monk Arittha Formerly-of-the-Vulture-Killers, on arrival he said, "The Teacher calls you, friend Arittha."

"As you say, my friend," the monk Arittha Formerly-of-the-Vulture-Killers replied. Then he went to the Blessed One and, on arrival, having bowed down to him, sat to one side. As he was sitting there, the Blessed One said to him, "Is it true, Arittha, that this pernicious viewpoint has arisen in you — 'As I understand the Dhamma taught by the Blessed One, those acts the Blessed One says are obstructive, when indulged in, are not genuine obstructions'?"

"Yes, indeed, lord. I understand the Dhamma taught by the Blessed One, and those acts the Blessed One says are obstructive, when indulged in are not genuine obstructions."

"Worthless man, from whom have you understood that Dhamma taught by me in such a way? Worthless man, haven't I in many ways described obstructive acts? And when indulged in they are genuine obstructions. I have said that sensual pleasures are of little satisfaction, much stress, much despair, & greater drawbacks. I have compared sensual pleasures to a chain of bones: of much stress, much despair, & greater drawbacks. I have compared sensual pleasures to a lump of flesh... a grass torch... a pit of glowing embers... a dream... borrowed goods... the fruits of a tree... a butcher's ax and chopping block... swords and spears... a snake's head: of much stress, much despair, & greater drawbacks. But you, worthless man, through your own wrong grasp [of the Dhamma], have both misrepresented us as well as injuring yourself and accumulating much demerit for yourself, for that will lead to your long-term harm & suffering."[2]

Then the Blessed One said to the monks, "What do you think, monks? Is this monk Arittha Formerly-of-the-Vulture-Killers even warm [3] in this Doctrine & Discipline?"

"How could he be, lord? No, lord."

When this was said, the monk Arittha Formerly-of-the-Vulture-Killers sat silent, abashed, his shoulders drooping, his head down, brooding, at a loss for words.

Then the Blessed One, seeing that the monk Arittha Formerly-of-the-Vulture-Killers was sitting silent, abashed, his shoulders drooping, his head down, brooding, at a loss for words, said to him, "Worthless man, you will be recognized for your own pernicious viewpoint. I will cross-examine the monks on this matter."

Then the Blessed One addressed the monks, "Monks, do you, too, understand the Dhamma as taught by me in the same way that the monk Arittha Formerly-of-the-Vulture-Killers does when, through his own wrong grasp, both misrepresents us as well as injuring himself and accumulating much demerit for himself?"

"No, lord, for in many ways the Blessed One has described obstructive acts to us, and when indulged in they are genuine obstructions. The Blessed One has said that sensual pleasures are of little satisfaction, much stress, much despair, & greater drawbacks. The Blessed One has compared sensual pleasures to a chain of bones: of much stress, much despair, & greater drawbacks. The Blessed One has compared sensual pleasures to a lump of flesh... a grass torch... a pit of glowing embers... a dream... borrowed goods... the fruits of a tree... a butcher's ax and chopping block... swords and spears... a snake's head: of much stress, much despair, & greater drawbacks."

"It's good, monks, that you understand the Dhamma taught by me in this way, for in many ways I have described obstructive acts to you, and when indulged in they are genuine obstructions. I have said that sensual pleasures are of little satisfaction, much stress, much despair, & greater drawbacks. I have compared sensual pleasures to a chain of bones: of much stress, much despair, & greater drawbacks. I have compared sensual pleasures to a lump of flesh... a grass torch... a pit of glowing embers... a dream... borrowed goods... the fruits of a tree... a butcher's ax and chopping block... swords and spears... a snake's head: of much stress, much despair, & greater drawbacks. But this monk Arittha Formerly-of-the-Vulture-Killers, through his own wrong grasp [of the Dhamma], has both misrepresented us as well as injuring himself and accumulating much demerit for himself, and that will lead to this worthless man's long-term harm & suffering. For a person to indulge in sensual pleasures without sensual passion, without sensual perception, without sensual thinking: That isn't possible. [4]

-MN 22
Peace,
James
User avatar
Mkoll
 
Posts: 4151
Joined: Wed Dec 05, 2012 6:55 pm
Location: California, USA

Re: Ingram, et al - "Hard Core Dharma" & claims of attainmen

Postby Unrul3r » Wed May 28, 2014 8:13 pm

A sutta that might help:
MN 76 wrote:“But, Master Ananda, when a bhikkhu is an arahant with taints destroyed, one who has lived the holy life, done what had to be done, laid down the burden, reached the true goal, destroyed the fetters of being, and is completely liberated through final knowledge, could he enjoy sensual pleasures?”
“Sandaka, when a bhikkhu is an arahant with taints destroyed … and is completely liberated through final knowledge, he is incapable of transgression in five cases. A bhikkhu whose taints are destroyed is incapable of deliberately depriving a living being of life; he is incapable of taking what is not given, that is, of stealing; he is incapable of indulging in sexual intercourse; he is incapable of knowingly speaking falsehood; he is incapable of enjoying sensual pleasures by storing them up as he did formerly in lay life.[1] When a bhikkhu is an arahant with taints destroyed … he is incapable of transgression in these five cases.[2]

[1][ MA: He is incapable of storing up food provisions and other pleasurable goods and subsequently enjoying them.]
[2][ At DN 29.26/iii.133 four other things that the arahant cannot do are mentioned: he cannot take a wrong course of action because of desire, hatred, fear, or delusion.]

:anjali:
User avatar
Unrul3r
 
Posts: 164
Joined: Sat Oct 16, 2010 6:29 pm
Location: Porto, Portugal

PreviousNext

Return to Open Dhamma

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot], Yahoo [Bot] and 6 guests