dhamma follower wrote:
SamKR wrote: In ultimate sense sati arises not because we intend but because of causes and conditions (intentions). However, for pragmatic purpose, until there is direct insight into not-self it is okay (perhaps unavoidable, and for many people highly beneficial) to think that we can have intention to have sati (or right actions):
Are you saying that wrong view is beneficial to some?
No, wrong view is not beneficial to anyone. But my point is: Many people do not grasp the teaching of anatta
from the very beginning, but they have to protect themselves from wrong deeds rightaway. So, for them it is better to control themselves (thinking "I
will control myself from doing wrong deeds to protect myself
from bad results"), than not doing any effort to control.
dhamma follower wrote: SamKR wrote:
" "Thus you should train yourselves
: 'We will develop mindfulness
immersed in the body. We will pursue it, hand it the reins and take it as a basis, give it a grounding, steady it, consolidate it, and undertake it well.' That is how you should train yourselves."
The sutta can be understood differently by different people. Who knows the level of understanding of the people to whom this instruction was given and how they understood them. Even right now, i could give a very different explanation of this sutta that you might disagree with. But the Buddha knew people's accumulations and each instruction was given to a particular listener. And the right understanding of his words can not go against his teaching of anatta.
Yes, I agree that the suttas can be understood differently by different people. And, I am not saying that whatever you said, or what Acharn Sujin Boriharnwanaket says is not right. I don't feel myself qualified to evaluate her teachings although I think her teachings are excellent and I believe they lead to realization. My only point is that there are different people at different levels, and that it is not necessary to understand anatta
right-away; they can realize it gradually while developing in Sila, Samadhi
, and Panna
. Perfect right view does not happen all at once. In the beginning, there can be just an inclination towards right view. After all the Buddha said:
Uposatha Sutta wrote:
Just as the ocean has a gradual shelf, a gradual slope, a gradual inclination, with a sudden drop-off only after a long stretch; in the same way this Dhamma & Vinaya has a gradual training, a gradual performance, a gradual practice, with a penetration to gnosis only after a long stretch.
dhamma follower wrote:
SamKR wrote:For a beginner (who does not understand not-self), it is beneficial to think that "I should control myself from doing evil things" so that he is protected from evil deeds. Of course, when controlling himself from doing evil deeds, "he" actually did not control "himself"; there was no controller; the control happenedbecause of some causes and conditions (one of them is the thinking that "I should control myself")
Can thinking "I can control my self" condition abstaining from doing evil deeds? If it is so, we could say, thinking "I can control my self" can condition not going to the toilet for 1 week.
Can a person thinking "I can control my-self" always keep 5 precepts?
Sometimes such thinking (which itself is result of other conditions) helps to abstain from doing evil deeds. Sometimes due to other conditionings being stronger this becomes very difficult. That's why there is "right effort
"There is the case where a monk generates desire, endeavors, activates persistence, upholds & exerts his intent for the sake of the non-arising of evil, unskillful qualities that have not yet arisen."
dhamma follower wrote:A sotapanna, someone who has thoroughly understood "uncontrolable"-anattaness, never breaks the five precept. So which one is better condition for sila?
Definitely, sotapanna has understood anatta very well, and has more right view than non-sotapanna, and does not break the precepts. But almost all people (except very few) are not sotapanna.
dhamma follower wrote:
SamKR wrote:Yes, even if there is not any strong understanding of anatta initially, by continuous practice of the noble eight-fold path (including sitting meditation, of course) and understanding of impermanence, and suffering (which are easier to understand than anatta) one will gradually reach the level where there is direct and full understanding of anatta and illusion of so called "free will".
The eight-fold path is led by right view. If there 's no right view, we can not talk about the eight-fold Path at all.
Yes, I agree. My point is that the "right view" does not come at once, it is a gradual process.
dhamma follower wrote:I suppose you don't mean the sitting posture can condition right view to arise?
If there is no right view now, can there be right view while sitting?
What is the cause and what is the effect here?
I don't mean that just sitting posture will help to arise right view. Sitting meditation may not even be necessary, I don't know. I just emphasize that if many people find sitting meditation helps them to understand some subtle truths (step by step, in a gradual way), then that's good. In the beginning they may meditate thinking that "I am meditating". But later after they understand the three characteristics, they will reach the stage where they find "there is observation, this is consciousness,...etc, arising and passing away, these are four noble truths... "
dhamma follower wrote: You talked about understanding impermanence.Impermanence of what? of a sitting yogi?
Impermanence of all
that makes the 'yogi' (whether sitting, walking or sleeping).
dhamma follower wrote: I might sound a little bit mocking, but actually I used to think like you, until I realized it was only words and vague ideas and imaginations. If the reality which arises now is not yet understood as just a reality, then impermanence, dukkha, the three marks etc... are only words.
I don't find you mocking. I have also changed my understandings many times. I agree that we should understand phenomena as it arises.