The causes for wisdom

[Alex123]

RobertK,

Some posts suggested that silabataparamasa only applied to things like dog duty asectics and other extreme practices.
So I repost this to make it clear that silabataparamsa can ve very subtle.

267. Another [thinks] through rules-and-vows(silabataparamasa) clinging, “... So rules-andvows clinging is a condition for all three, namely, the sense-desire, fine-material and immaterial kinds of becoming with their analysis and their synthesis. The material and immaterial becomings are the results of true jhana: extra-ordinary degrees of mahakusala.

Bolded portions are mine.

1) In that quote it doesn't say that meditation is rites and rituals.
Please note,
2nd) what is rejected is CLINGING, CLINGING to rites and rituals.

[tiltbillings]

However if one believes that insight depends on being in a certain posture,

Who is saying this? Insight depends on wisdom.

No one is saying that except the Sujin people. It is part of distorting caricature of meditation that is part of the Sujin talking points as a way dismissing meditation.

[mikenz66]

Hi DF,

Being an ex of the meditation camp that you are referring to...

Why do there have to be camps?

It is just a way of saying "You are describing exactly where I was as well as many people I know" -which is a fact. No offence intended. I apologize if any.

As I said, many of us have realised that much of what they were doing in meditation was fuelling a sense of self, etc, etc. These are not insights unique to KS and her students. Your conclusion was to consider the exercise a failure and choose another path. Which is fine. My conclusion was that actually seeing that those problems are there was progress, and that the teachers I have been working with actually understood those issues quite well.

It would be more useful to share these experiences and views, rather than trying to prove that one view is better than another

I sincerely don't see how to share my views that I believe to be true (what I think I am doing) and not to show that it is closer to what is taught by the Buddha than another view which is different from mine?

I'm sorry, but that's certainly what it sounds like. And it's definitely what I experienced when I met some KS students. There was a very strong pressure to admit that what I was doing was wrong. To be fair, perhaps that's the agreed style of that group, to meet and argue passionately over such things. It may be useful in the context of the group. But to impose it on someone who just wanted to meet and discuss Dhamma was not a very productive way of going about it.

In the end, views don't belong to anyone, Let's just discuss views ?

Since I don't think either of us are claiming to have got beyond having a sense of self, and views about various things, we are actually still talking about your view and my view.


Mike

[tiltbillings]

i don't have a choice over my views. They are conditioned, as any other sankhara dhamma. It was different 10 years ago. It was different 10 months and 10 days ago. Never really the same. It changes as considering over dhammas occurs again and again, by conditions.

Of course you do have a choice. Why would you think otherwise?

[dhamma follower]

It is just a way of saying "You are describing exactly where I was as well as many people I know" -which is a fact. No offence intended. I apologize if any.

As I said, many of us have realised that much of what they were doing in meditation was fuelling a sense of self, etc, etc. These are not insights unique to KS and her students.


Mike

I think It is here that Robert made his comment:

I think that many of the meditation groups do say that insight can arise anywhere,
so it is not clear why they then seem to preference certain activities...

To which I gave my answer....

Since I don't think either of us are claiming to have got beyond having a sense of self, and views about various things, we are actually still talking about your view and my view

I believe it is always helpful to be reminded that views don't belong to anyone. That's where the greatness of the Buddha's teaching can affect our ocean of ignorance and wrong views.

Beside, views are also a moment-to-moment business, rise and fall. The danger is taking views to be yours or mine. It is bound to happen as long as we are not a sotapana. However, at anytime, there can be a moment of understanding that they are not mine, which is right understanding, and the path is being built, at that moment, before another moment of akusala might arise again.

Brgds,

[tiltbillings]

Beside, views are also a moment-to-moment business, rise and fall. The danger is taking views to be yours or mine. It is bound to happen as long as we are not a sotapana. However, at anytime, there can be a moment of understanding that they are not mine, which is right understanding, and the path is being built, at that moment, before another moment of akusala might arise again.

This attempt at impersonal language really make little sense and all it seems to is dis-empower you guys from actually doing any real practice, or keeps you guys from recognizing what your actual practice is.

[tiltbillings]

What do you call "success with meditation", Tilt? The jhanas? 1rst insight? 1rst Path? Arahant Path?

To be able to meditate when I am really quite ill or in pain. The rest is of little direct interest to me.

It is quite pointless to talk about failure and success here

You opened that door by your own accounting of your failure at meditation and generalizing from that to everyone else, and by your unwarranted lobha business about doing walking meditation slowly.

[Mr Man]

and the path is being built, at that moment,

Hi dhamma follower
So the path is somthing that we accumulate?

I also wondered If you could come back to the following question, which you missed: "What you are putting forward are your views or Khun Sujin's views, which as you say are conditioned. Or is there an implication that you are becoming or that Khun Sujin is a conduit?"
Thanks.

[dhamma follower]

What do you call "success with meditation", Tilt? The jhanas? 1rst insight? 1rst Path? Arahant Path?

To be able to meditate when I am really quite ill or in pain.

Dear Tilt,

Could you please explaine the word "meditation" here? What kind of bhavana you are referring to?

I'd appreciate if you could explain it in term of paramatha dhammas, what is the object, what kind of citta etc... But if you don't want to, that's fine.

Tks and brgds,

D.F

[dhamma follower]

and the path is being built, at that moment,

Hi dhamma follower
So the path is somthing that we accumulate?
Thanks.

Dear Mr Man,

I appreciate your comments and questions.

There's no "we" who accumulate. Such moment of understanding can condition other moments of understanding in the future, by way of different paccaya. You might know that there are 24 different ways dhammas can condition each other. There's no need for any "self" for samsara to keep going.

I also wondered If you could come back to the following question, which you missed: "What you are putting forward are your views or Khun Sujin's views, which as you say are conditioned. Or is there an implication that you are becoming or that Khun Sujin is a conduit?"

I am not sure I understand well your question. As you know, in terms of absolute realities, views don't belong to anyone.
But if your question is to ask whether what I've been putting forward comes from my own understanding or I just repeat Khun Sujin views because I believe they are right, then my answer is I would not be able to assert to myself that her views are right if there had not been enough consideration from my own part. Similarly, if someone were to ask you: considering that lying is unwholesome is your view or the Buddha's view, what would you answer?

By "being conditioned", I meant they are not owned by any self, created by any self. Because they are conditioned, they are bound to change. No one can know what "my" views will be next month, next life. Only a sotapana knows.

Brgds,
D.F

[retrofuturist]

What do you call "success with meditation", Tilt? The jhanas? 1rst insight? 1rst Path? Arahant Path?

To be able to meditate when I am really quite ill or in pain.

Dear Tilt,

Could you please explaine the word "meditation" here? What kind of bhavana you are referring to?

I'd appreciate if you could explain it in term of paramatha dhammas, what is the object, what kind of citta etc... But if you don't want to, that's fine.

Tks and brgds,

D.F

People can only talk to you on your level only when they express themselves in terms of paramattha-dhammas.

Since you are the one here living in ultimate reality: Can you summarize the cetasikas that accompanied your act of composing this response?
Maybe we might learn something from you.

[Mr Man]

Hi dhamma follower

So the path is something that we accumulate?

There's no "we" who accumulate. Such moment of understanding can condition other moments of understanding in the future, by way of different paccaya. You might know that there are 24 different ways dhammas can condition each other. There's no need for any "self" for samsara to keep going.

So could we say that a momentum is being allowed to develop? And there is an order within that momentum?

also wondered If you could come back to the following question, which you missed: "What you are putting forward are your views or Khun Sujin's views, which as you say are conditioned. Or is there an implication that you are becoming or that Khun Sujin is a conduit?"

I am not sure I understand well your question. As you know, in terms of absolute realities, views don't belong to anyone.
But if your question is to ask whether what I've been putting forward comes from my own understanding or I just repeat Khun Sujin views because I believe they are right, then my answer is I would not be able to assert to myself that her views are right if there had not been enough consideration from my own part.

But where are you? If an activity (formal meditation for example) should be dismissed because it could be touched with such and such a taint wouldn’t your activity of “consideration” also have to be dismissed because it could be touched with a taint? Couldn’t we say “meditation” and your “consideration” are equal? And then we can look at the positive aspects and potential of different activities.

if someone were to ask you: considering that lying is unwholesome is your view or the Buddha's view, what would you answer?

I would say that it is a view and convention that we share.

[robertk]

What a smug smart-ass response. People can only talk to you on your level only when they express themselves in terms of paramattha-dhammas.
You are ridiculous.
u.

Well paramatha Dhamma is a Theravada term. I don't see it as insulting to ask more about what somone means by meditation. It can help to clarify a point.

[tiltbillings]

What a smug smart-ass response. People can only talk to you on your level only when they express themselves in terms of paramattha-dhammas.
You are ridiculous.
u.

Well paramatha Dhamma is a Theravada term. I don't see it as insulting to ask more about what somone means by meditation. It can help to clarify a point.

Given that I asked dhamma follower to use coneventional speech to explain a point and he refused, or was unable, to do so, I see no compelling reason to indulge in this Abhidhamma-speak that is common among you Sujin followers, but not among the larger field of Dhamma practitioners.

Also, it is worth keeping in mind from the commentary to the Anguttara Nikaya:

Herein references to living beings, gods, Brahma, etc., are sammuti-kathā, whereas references to impermanence, suffering, egolessness, the aggregates of the empiric individuality, the spheres and elements of sense perception and mind-cognition, bases of mindfulness, right effort, etc., are paramattha-kathā. One who is capable of understanding and penetrating to the truth and hoisting the flag of Arahantship when the teaching is set out in terms of generally accepted conventions, to him the Buddha preaches the doctrine based on sammuti-kathā. One who is capable of understanding and penetrating to the truth and hoisting the flag of Arahantship when the teaching is set out in terms of ultimate categories, to him the Buddha preaches the doctrine based on paramattha-kathā.

To one who is capable of awakening to the truth through sammuti-kathā , the teaching is not presented on the basis of paramattha-kathā, and conversely, to one who is capable of awakening to the truth through paramattha-kathā, the teaching is not presented on the basis of sammuti-kathā. There is this simile on this matter: Just as a teacher of the three Vedas who is capable of explaining their meaning in different dialects might teach his pupils, adopting the particular dialect, which
each pupil understands, even so the Buddha preaches the doctrine adopting, according to the suitability of the occasion, either the sammuti- or the paramattha-kathā. It is by taking into consideration the ability of each individual to understand the Four Noble Truths, that the Buddha presents his teaching, either by way of sammuti, or by way of paramattha, or by way of both. Whatever the method adopted the purpose is the same, to show the way to Immortality through the analysis of mental and physical phenomena. AA. Vol. I, pp.54-55

http://kr.buddhism.org/~skb/down/papers/094.pdf

sammuti-kathā is not inferior to paramattha-kathā. And since this is not an Abhidhamma section we need not be limited to trying to speak in a stilted Abhidhamma-ese, which, as has been demonstrated here by those who use this sort of speak, does not make anything clearer.

[robertk]

Fair enough!

[tiltbillings]

What do you call "success with meditation", Tilt? The jhanas? 1rst insight? 1rst Path? Arahant Path?

To be able to meditate when I am really quite ill or in pain.

Dear Tilt,

Could you please explaine the word "meditation" here? What kind of bhavana you are referring to?

I'd appreciate if you could explain it in term of paramatha dhammas, what is the object, what kind of citta etc... But if you don't want to, that's fine.

Tks and brgds,

D.F

See: viewtopic.php?f=16&t=15952&p=229232#p229232

I'd appreciate if you could explain it in term of paramatha dhammas, what is the object, what kind of citta etc... But if you don't want to, that's fine.

I asked you here -- viewtopic.php?f=16&t=15952&start=160#p229238 -- to express a point using conventional speech, and you redused to do so. I pressed you a second time and still do not do so. Also, given your refusal to directly address points I directly raise in response to points you raise, your request is a bit tone deaf. I have no interest in indulging in the Sujin style Abhidhamma-speak. It is neither necessary, nor do I agree with the lack of responsibility that is strongly implied by the Sujin style Abhidhamma-speak, which runs counter to the Buddha's teachings.

Now, with that out of the way, I'll address: "Could you please explaine the word "meditation" here? What kind of bhavana you are referring to?" Concentration and mindfulness with clear comphrehension, which allows me to stay clearly and precisely attentive to the aches, pains, and such -- as well as the pscychological reponses to the physical symptoms -- that may be part of the particular illness as they arise and fall, and which allows me not to get lost in dukkha. You did vipassana practice for 10 years, so you should understand this and you should understand the reason for doing such a practice and what comes from it.

[pt1]

nor do I agree with the lack of responsibility that is strongly implied by the Sujin style Abhidhamma-speak, which runs counter to the Buddha's teachings.

That's going a bit too far. I like meditating and I also like what KSujin is saying. When KS (or more likely, her younger followers) generalize about naughty meditators making mistakes (kind of like when meditators generalize about naughty abhidhammikas and their useless/ridiculous book-knowledge), I don’t mind that they probably have me in mind. It helps when someone points out my mistakes, and I think there might even be a sutta out there about thankfulness to those who straighten out your wrong views. And if I’m not making any mistakes, seems the only constructive thing is to thank the person for the kind (or malicious) warning and move on.

Best wishes

[tiltbillings]

nor do I agree with the lack of responsibility that is strongly implied by the Sujin style Abhidhamma-speak, which runs counter to the Buddha's teachings.

That's going a bit too far.

I don't think so. My point is exemplified in the following attempt at impersoinal Abhidhamma-speak:

"i don't have a choice over my views. They are conditioned, as any other sankhara dhamma. It was different 10 years ago. It was different 10 months and 10 days ago. Never really the same. It changes as considering over dhammas occurs again and again, by conditions."
http://dhammawheel.com/viewtopic.php?f= ... 80#p230829

[Virgo]

Don't be stingy with your words. What is the right path and what is the wrong path?

One needs to understand magga-paccaya to really understand it.

Kevin

Of course, this is a non-answer.

It clearly was an answer. Rather than burdening those who don't want to read it with a long explanation of exactly what magga-paccaya is, I simply stated "one needs to understand magga-paccaya to really understand it". People can then google it and read about it, or read about it in books. Perhaps it is a "non-answer" to you because it used "abhidhamma-speak", a term you seem to have coined.

The traditional metta practice as we see in the suttas and the Visuddhimagga was utterly dismissed. discounted as being wrong path was interesting, but expected in light of what as been said above, and the rather triumphalist responses of the questioners of Sujin in regards to the traditionalist to metta practice approach was very interesting. So, the question is: why did you link this talk? For what purpose?

I linked to the talk simply because I thought it was relevant to the conversation.

What was dismissed was not samatha bhavana, but the development of wrong concentration.

Kevin

[tiltbillings]

Of course, this is a non-answer.

It clearly was an answer. Rather than burdening those who don't want to read it with a long explanation of exactly what magga-paccaya is, I simply stated "one needs to understand magga-paccaya to really understand it". People can then google it and read about it, or read about it in books. Perhaps it is a "non-answer" to you because it used "abhidhamma-speak", a term you seem to have coined.

Or you could have used concise, lucid conventional-speak.

The traditional metta practices as we see in the suttas and the Visuddhimagga was utterly dismissed. discounted as being wrong path was interesting, but expected in light of what as been said above, and the rather triumphalist responses of the questioners of Sujin in regards to the traditionalist to metta practice approach was very interesting. So, the question is: why did you link this talk? For what purpose?

I linked to the talk simply because I thought it was relevant to the conversation.

It was, but certainly not in the way you intended.

What was dismissed was not samatha bhavana, but the development of wrong concentration.

In other words, what was utterly dismissed was the traditional metta practices as we see in the suttas and the Visuddhimagga that talks about deliberately cultivating metta.