danieLion wrote:
There's no need to go
ad hominem on me (which I believe is a violation of
TOS #1 and 2a). If you have specific criticisms, I'll entertain them. What exactly makes it "cheap"? What precisely makes it "shallow"? In what specific ways do you find my reasoning "unjustified"? In what ways, exactly, do you find it "insufficiently researched"? Otherwise, if you insist on resorting to name-calling and personal attack, any further free exchange of ideas will be severly inhibited if not impossible.
It was not "ad hominem" because it was not directed "to the person" it was directed to the reasoning. Which as I stated was
1) cheap
As in, a cheap shot, not giving due consideration to the point another is actually making, re-characterizing it as a straw man, easily knocked over.
If we give a respectful reading to the point Ven. Mahāsi was making it is clear that he is not saying anything that, as you said, "implies a contradiction (and borders on the tautological)." He does not say that there is no value or place for the intellect in any way whatsoever. That would be absurd. He is clearly and plainly stating that the intellect is not what reaches the stages of
insight, a.k.a. "vipassana" which is the topic of this thread.
2) shallow
Meaning, presenting no depth of understanding regarding the topic. Which again, involves vipassana. Although you present a strawman characterization of Ven. Mahāsi's comments, you provide no explanation of just how it is the practice of vipassana does proceed, and in what ways, exactly, it does or does not involve intellectual activity, nor provide any detail on how it is that whatever activity there might be could be equated with the definition of "critical thinking" that we have so far.
3) unjustified
Merely based upon my usage of the phrase "the way" you concluded that my
thinking is "rigid." First of all, if you're going to come to an inferential conclusion about the contents of someone else's mind it should have a much more solid basis than the mere usage of two words, a common expression - "the way." Making conclusions about the content of another's mind, unless you have the psychic power to see into it directly (I believe in such a thing but do not posses it myself) is a generally inadvisable practice owing to the various possibilities for the internal mental conditions behind whatever they said. You did not ask me for any clarification on just how flexible, inflexible, narrow, or wide my view of the practice might be before you launched into a characterization of my thinking about it.
Secondly, the Buddha himself used the expression "the way," as in the following:
"And this, monks, is the noble truth of the way of practice leading to the cessation of stress: precisely this Noble Eightfold Path — right view, right resolve, right speech, right action, right livelihood, right effort, right mindfulness, right concentration.
Should we conclude that the Buddha lacked "critical thinking" and had "rigid thinking" because of that statement? I think not.
4)
blatantly insufficiently researched
Failure to examine how the Buddha spoke of "the way", as above.
Failure to notice the reference for the location in the sutta pitaka which you demanded in support of Ven. Mahāsi's statement, was given in that statement itself. It even has quotation marks.
Venerable Mahāsi Sayadaw wrote:
When the Buddha was first considering whether or not to teach, he thought, “This truth that I have realised is very profound. Though it is sublime and conducive to inner peace, it is hard to understand. Since it is subtle and not accessible to mere intellect and logic, it can be realised only by the wise.”
You took no time to investigate what the Buddha said at that time (again, a lack of respectful consideration to the detail of what someone is saying.) Which, is recorded in SN 6.1 Ayacana Sutta: The Request
This Dhamma that I have discovered is deep, hard to see, hard to understand, peaceful and sublime, not within the sphere of reasoning, subtle, to be experienced by the wise.
Is Ven. Mahāsi's direct quotation of that very sutta passage accurate? Yes it is. Did you fail to notice it and look up the reference for yourself before you questioned whether such a statement could be found in the sutta pitaka? Yes you did.
"When one thing is practiced & pursued, ignorance is abandoned, clear knowing arises, the conceit 'I am' is abandoned, latent tendencies are uprooted, fetters are abandoned. Which one thing? Mindfulness immersed in the body." -AN 1.230