dhamma follower wrote: tiltbillings wrote:
It is not a matter of language, it is a matter of understanding. How would you describe the mind processes of those who attained enlightenment in the sutta? What lead them to the experience of Nibanna? I would be very surprised if you were to say they have realized the arising and passing away of a cow or of their own legs.
Have you ever noticed that you really do not answer questions put to you? These three sentences of yours do not address what I said, and if anything, you are coming across as saying quite directly that the suttas are inadequate to the task of discussing the Buddha's teachings. That is an interesting position to be in, and I certainly would not want to be there.
There are three ways to answer a question 1. Give direct answer to it; 2. By asking a question; 3. Remaining silence.
And again you did not address the points raised. You simply ignore what is being said to you.
Tilt, I was a very diligent student of that practice for ten years. I was told to go and do things slowly, because that would increase sati. I spent many sleepless nights making all kinds of resolve as being instructed.... Despite all my personal respect for the teachers I had, since they are really great persons for their kindness, patience and other qualities, I have to say that I don't find those ideas as being supported by my reading into the texts today.
So, you are generalizing from your experience to the whole of the practice. Your experience is not my experience. Sometimes, DF, one's practice fails, for whatever reason. It happens, and you should probably ask yourself why you stayed with it for ten years if it was not doing anything of any significance for you. Vipassana practice may have not been for; you may not have had the temperament for it. It kind of sounds like you were being a bit too rigid with your sleepless nights. But the point is that you cannot meaningful say that your experience is applicable to me or anyone else. For me, my vipassana practice has transformed my life and opened up the Buddha's teachings.
Now at least you seem to admit that only dhammas can arise and pass away, not people, or legs.
Why would I not admit it? I never denied it. And what are dhammas if not a way of talking about one's flow of experience? But that can be talked about from a sutta standpoint without getting caught up in the complexities of the Abhidhamma.
So there first has to be awareness and understanding of dhammas as dhammas, before the realization of their arising and passing away can occur, right? So it is Abhidhammic or it is simply truth?
One could practice like that, but it is not necessary to view the flow of one's experience, the conditioned rise and fall of experience in the adhidhammic terms. The Abhidhamma Is a tool, but it is not the only tool that Theravada has to offer.
When you slow down the movements in order to have sati, what is there? lobha!
Says you. It sounds like you are repeating talking points of your group. Greed was not been my experience with slowing down. I found with slowing down remarkable clarity in the rise and of the flow experience, no wanting; rather, a freeing letting go.
Can lobha condition sati to arise? If there is no understanding of what sati is and what are the conditions for it to arise, how can there be real sati which arises to be aware of dhammas as just dhammas (and not "I" am aware of this or that)? So real arising and passing away is still too far, truly....
You are so intent on trying to show that what I do is wrong. I wonder what negative dhamma that is.
With your Sujin practice, you have a way of practice that may work for you, and if it does, good, and you should work hard at it, but if it turns you into an us-versus-them sort of person, which is what I am seeing here with you, then there probably is a problem, in my opinion, which you do not have to share.
You did that vipassana practice for ten years, but you seem not to really have much understanding of it as an actual practice.