Howdy Brizzy,
Brizzy wrote:If our beliefs are challenged, then this is sometimes a good thing. The one thing that such challenging, can accomplish is to spur us on to investigate more. If we feel we dont need to investigate, because we "know" then that is also good and we would not feel upset if our views and opinions are challenged.
If my language in any way conveyed that I am "upset," that was a misfire. I'm not feeling upset. It's sometimes difficult to discuss differing viewpoints on print-based boards like this, because people are constantly assuming that the other person is feeling upset when there is disagreement. Rest assured, that is not the case here, and thanks for your concern.
A few thoughts: With regard to MN24, the purifications also are mentioned in the Dasuttara Sutta in the DN, so their inclusion in MN24 is not without precedent. You are right, though, that (according to the footnote in my translation) these seven purifications are not analyzed as a set anwhere else in the Nikayas, but that the sevenfold scheme forms the scaffolding for the Visuddhimagga. This footnote doesn't go so far as to suggest a forgery, however, if that's what you're suggesting. Although it seems as though we ought to keep an open mind about these things.
On the subject of sitting techniques, it seems clear to me that there are many examples in the Suttas of individuals engaged in sitting practice, and the Buddha praising that. (
Here, for example.) And there are examples in the Suttas of individuals approaching learned monks for guidance in matters pertaining to the Dhamma. So it seems natural to me that today, lay people such as ourselves would approach those of more advanced learning for guidance in matters pertaining to the Dhamma, such as whether sitting practice is appropriate and, if so, how to engage in it. All of this seems to be in accordance with what we find in the Suttas.
But I find no Sutta material to validate your practice of putting yourself out as an authority in opposition to Dhamma teachers including venerable monks. If we are going to follow the example of the Suttas very strictly, then I would ask you to examine your own approach to Dhamma instruction here in this thread in the same manner. Can you find me some examples in the Suttas of lay followers challenging the instructions of venerable monks, and of those lay followers interpreting the Buddha's teachings to give instructions to others, and the Buddha praising that? Because it seems to me that you have a double standard here: You're asking for a strict Sutta validation of specific sitting-practice techniques to justify engaging in them, but you do not seem to worry about having a strict Sutta validation of your own interpretation technique before engaging in it.
Metta