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

Exploring Theravāda's connections to other paths - what can we learn from other traditions, religions and philosophies?
User avatar
Jaidyn
Posts: 144
Joined: Wed Aug 24, 2011 6:47 am

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

Post by Jaidyn »

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" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

(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
bluebuddha
Posts: 2
Joined: Tue Feb 25, 2014 10:35 pm

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

Post by bluebuddha »

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.
Denisa
Posts: 147
Joined: Thu May 15, 2014 1:57 am

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

Post by Denisa »

Found the below quoted section (page 24) 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."
EDIT: page #
Last edited by Denisa on Thu May 29, 2014 5:05 am, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
waterchan
Posts: 699
Joined: Fri May 07, 2010 7:17 pm
Location: Kamaloka

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

Post by waterchan »

...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
Mkoll
Posts: 6594
Joined: Wed Dec 05, 2012 6:55 pm
Location: USA

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

Post by Mkoll »

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:
Namo tassa bhagavato arahato samma sambuddhassa
Namo tassa bhagavato arahato samma sambuddhassa
Namo tassa bhagavato arahato samma sambuddhassa
User avatar
waterchan
Posts: 699
Joined: Fri May 07, 2010 7:17 pm
Location: Kamaloka

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

Post by waterchan »

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
Modus.Ponens
Posts: 3853
Joined: Sat Jan 03, 2009 2:38 am
Location: Gallifrey

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

Post by Modus.Ponens »

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.
'This is peace, this is exquisite — the resolution of all fabrications; the relinquishment of all acquisitions; the ending of craving; dispassion; cessation; Unbinding.' - Jhana Sutta
User avatar
Mkoll
Posts: 6594
Joined: Wed Dec 05, 2012 6:55 pm
Location: USA

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

Post by Mkoll »

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 . . .
Namo tassa bhagavato arahato samma sambuddhassa
Namo tassa bhagavato arahato samma sambuddhassa
Namo tassa bhagavato arahato samma sambuddhassa
User avatar
Mkoll
Posts: 6594
Joined: Wed Dec 05, 2012 6:55 pm
Location: USA

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

Post by Mkoll »

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
Namo tassa bhagavato arahato samma sambuddhassa
Namo tassa bhagavato arahato samma sambuddhassa
Namo tassa bhagavato arahato samma sambuddhassa
User avatar
Unrul3r
Posts: 174
Joined: Sat Oct 16, 2010 6:29 pm
Location: Porto, Portugal

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

Post by Unrul3r »

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
Modus.Ponens
Posts: 3853
Joined: Sat Jan 03, 2009 2:38 am
Location: Gallifrey

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

Post by Modus.Ponens »

Arahats experience pleasant sensations through contact with all the 6 senses. Furthermore, the obstructive acts are obstructive of attaining arahatship. What do they obstruct in the arahat? The only sense I can make from that sutta is that for a non arahat it is impossible to indulge in sensual pleasures without being attached to them. That doesn't apply to the arahat, though. The arahat experiences pleasantness. He may even cultivate pleasantness, through jhana or mindfulness.

If an arahat experiences pleasant sensations, can you rule out automatically that it is possible for him to have an orgasm? Not an orgasm in the lust sense. An orgasm in the sense of the physical process.
'This is peace, this is exquisite — the resolution of all fabrications; the relinquishment of all acquisitions; the ending of craving; dispassion; cessation; Unbinding.' - Jhana Sutta
User avatar
Modus.Ponens
Posts: 3853
Joined: Sat Jan 03, 2009 2:38 am
Location: Gallifrey

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

Post by Modus.Ponens »

Unrul3r wrote: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:
Thank you Unruler.

Although I'm pretty sure you are arguing the other way, this sutta actually makes my point. Is it reasonable to believe that a lay arahat is incapable of storing food provisions? That doesn't make sense, in my opinion. Therefore, this qualification of "incapable" is best interpreted as context dependent.

I'm not saying that if an arahat kills that would be fine because he is an arahat. That's not what I'm saying at all. What I'm saying is that there is no misterious physical force that would restrain the arahat, had he decided to kill another human being, from killing him. However, that doesn't mean he would decide to kill. It's fairly straightforward that there's almost no situation where an arahat would kill. It's just the case that, had he decided that he would kill (for example, very hypothetically, helping another arahat commiting suicide) he could do it. The point is that there's no magical force preventing him from killing. He just doesn't do it because he is wise.

EDIT: I have to clarify that I'm not holding these views firmly. I'm just saying these are possible interpretations of the texts which make sense of Ingram's words. Some of these interpretations I agree with. Others I really don't know. But I can't just throw away everything Ingram is saying because of an impulsive reaction to his words.
Last edited by Modus.Ponens on Wed May 28, 2014 8:31 pm, edited 1 time in total.
'This is peace, this is exquisite — the resolution of all fabrications; the relinquishment of all acquisitions; the ending of craving; dispassion; cessation; Unbinding.' - Jhana Sutta
User avatar
Alex123
Posts: 4035
Joined: Wed Mar 10, 2010 11:32 pm

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

Post by Alex123 »

Unrul3r wrote:A sutta that might help:
he is incapable of indulging in sexual intercourse;
I hate to be hair splitting, but, it is possible to question what "indulging" means. Does that phrase means
a) Arahant can have sex, but not to indulge in it.
or
b) Arahant can't have sex at all.

Personally, I think that arahantship should be defined as #b.
Modus.Ponens wrote:What I'm saying is that there is no misterious physical force that would restrain the arahat, had he decided to kill another human being, from killing him. ..The point is that there's no magical force preventing him from killing. He just doesn't do it because he is wise.

But sex involves a lot of deliberate intentions, and it is questionable if Arahant can have those intentions (or to follow them through) in the first place.

As for "incapable of storing", I guess Arahats don't hoard things which is not a problem if one is a monk - but a problem if one is alone at home.
User avatar
Mkoll
Posts: 6594
Joined: Wed Dec 05, 2012 6:55 pm
Location: USA

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

Post by Mkoll »

Modus.Ponens wrote:Arahats experience pleasant sensations through contact with all the 6 senses. Furthermore, the obstructive acts are obstructive of attaining arahatship. What do they obstruct in the arahat? The only sense I can make from that sutta is that for a non arahat it is impossible to indulge in sensual pleasures without being attached to them. That doesn't apply to the arahat, though. The arahat experiences pleasantness. He may even cultivate pleasantness, through jhana or mindfulness.

If an arahat experiences pleasant sensations, can you rule out automatically that it is possible for him to have an orgasm? Not an orgasm in the lust sense. An orgasm in the sense of the physical process.
The Buddha is saying it is impossible to indulge in sensual pleasures without craving for them. The arahant has, by definition, eliminated craving. So he doesn't seek out, acquire, and indulge in sensual pleasures because that is the origin of suffering (second Noble Truth). Physical orgasm is something that requires, uhm . . . cultivation, if you get my meaning.

Over and over, the suttas say that sensual pleasures are dangerous, are worldly and ignoble, to be avoided, etc. Why would the highest Buddhist saint, the ultimate exemplar of the Dhamma, suddenly seek out, acquire, and indulge in sensual pleasures at his attainment? It makes no sense. The opposite is shown to be true: please see the Therigatha and Theragatha for examples of arahants enjoying seclusion in the forest at their attainment.
Namo tassa bhagavato arahato samma sambuddhassa
Namo tassa bhagavato arahato samma sambuddhassa
Namo tassa bhagavato arahato samma sambuddhassa
User avatar
Unrul3r
Posts: 174
Joined: Sat Oct 16, 2010 6:29 pm
Location: Porto, Portugal

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

Post by Unrul3r »

Alex123 wrote:
Unrul3r wrote:A sutta that might help:
he is incapable of indulging in sexual intercourse;
I hate to be hair splitting, but, it is possible to question what "indulging" means. Does that phrase means
a) Arahant can have sex, but not to indulge in it.
or
b) Arahant can't have sex at all.

Personally, I think that arahantship should be defined as #b.
Indeed, I agree. I think that the arahat is incapable because he knows it will lead to suffering. It is not that he is physically incapable, he is psychologically incapable. It's like asking a regular person, "Would you cut yourself?", of course not. Because she knows it will lead to suffering. Further, if an arahat is well trained in the bliss of jhanas why would he indulge in sex. It doesn't make any sense to me.
Post Reply