Vipassana

[altar]

I'm pretty sure the Buddha encouraged meditation, vipassana, and jhana. So if there was a meditation technique based on the four foundations of mindfulness, that led to insight, I don't see why he would discourage it (Obviously there can be specific cases, even a majority of the time at least in theory, where certain types of meditation would be less appropriate).
Then there is the sutta (I believe it is in Bhikkhu Bodhi's anthology, and therefore elsewhere, too) that talks of 4 ways his disciples progress: insight preceded by concentration, concentration preceded by insight, the two together, and the last I think is someone who after a while loses confusion regarding the dhamma.
Also, as for there not being mention of attaining stream entry in meditation, it's interesting, but there is mention of many techniques, or at least six or seven, that lead to the deathless (food, body, death, inconstancy in conditioned things, suffering in conditioned things, what else?...), suggesting that these contemplations can lead to stream-entry.
I'm not sure that Goenka is of the opinion that jhana is not fruitful, but I think that jhana is discouraged during his retreats (at least the "normal jhanas"). This might seem silly, strange, because the Buddha encouraged jhana. But I'm not sure it is silly or strange. The Buddha also encouraged metta. Yet if one's main meditation object is the body, it might make sense to tell oneself "Okay, don't focus on metta, now you're going to be mindful of the body." If metta arises during mindfulness of the body, okay, but still one stays mindful of the body, not switching to cultivation of metta. Maybe a person could do both, but many like to stay to one technique at a time. In the same way, a person might say, "Okay, don't focus on jhana, now you're going to just observe ("[just observing]" sensations being a common instruction in Goenka, no?)"
I mean, I don't know, but if a person went into a jhana during a Goenka retreat I don't think the take on it would be, "That's not the instructions," but the take might be, to just keeping being mindful... if a sensation crops up, it crops up...

[puthujjana]

Hej Brizzy,

maybe you'll find this article interesting:

From Vipassana Hater to Vipassana Lover
http://theravadin.wordpress.com/2009/02 ... ana-lover/

[retrofuturist]

Greetings Brizzy,

Related topic...

How important is technique?
viewtopic.php?f=17&t=3503

Metta,
Retro.

[Brizzy]

Greetings Brizzy,

Related topic...

How important is technique?
viewtopic.php?f=17&t=3503

Metta,
Retro.

Hi Retro

Interesting thread. I agree that "technique" can be over-emphasised. I prefer to use a more experential approach and I find the Buddhas similes and instructions invaluable in doing so.

Brizzy

[Brizzy]

Hej Brizzy,

maybe you'll find this article interesting:

From Vipassana Hater to Vipassana Lover
http://theravadin.wordpress.com/2009/02 ... ana-lover/

Hi puthujjana

Interesting, confusing and a little fanciful. Sati is reflection/contemplation/remembering - leading to samadhi/jhana, leading to understanding( although if it is a jhana as taught by the Buddha, a lot of understanding has already taken place in attaining that jhana). If "noting" can do all this great!

Brizzy

[Freawaru]

Hi Brizzy,

Do you know what Right View is as defined by the Buddha?

Do you? By own experience?

The Buddha says the requisite for right view is listening to the Dhamma.

And wise consideration. No wisdom, no wise consideration. Thus wisdom has to be achieved before Listening to the Dhamma can lead to right view.

Hatha yoga is a religion infatuated with the body. A healthy body maybe but not a healthy mind( if you go along with its religious teachings).

Hatha yoga is not a religion at all. I started practice during my atheism phase. It is a practice of physical exercise (asanas) compared with a practice of steadfast concentration on mind and body and a development of perpetual awareness. No need for any religious or ideological teachings.

Nobody taught the Buddha the four jhanas that the Buddha went on to teach.

Can you prove this? That the two highest jhanas were taught to him are described in the suttas. And as the others precede these I see no reason to assume otherwise.

There is a world of difference between the Hindu & Buddhist jhanas.

Describe their difference by your own experience, please, so that I can understand this statement. Describe your experience of what you call Hindu jhana and your experience of what you call Buddhist jhana.

[Brizzy]

Hi Brizzy,

Do you know what Right View is as defined by the Buddha?

Do you? By own experience?

The Buddha says the requisite for right view is listening to the Dhamma.

And wise consideration. No wisdom, no wise consideration. Thus wisdom has to be achieved before Listening to the Dhamma can lead to right view.

Hatha yoga is a religion infatuated with the body. A healthy body maybe but not a healthy mind( if you go along with its religious teachings).

Hatha yoga is not a religion at all. I started practice during my atheism phase. It is a practice of physical exercise (asanas) compared with a practice of steadfast concentration on mind and body and a development of perpetual awareness. No need for any religious or ideological teachings.

Nobody taught the Buddha the four jhanas that the Buddha went on to teach.

Can you prove this? That the two highest jhanas were taught to him are described in the suttas. And as the others precede these I see no reason to assume otherwise.

There is a world of difference between the Hindu & Buddhist jhanas.

Describe their difference by your own experience, please, so that I can understand this statement. Describe your experience of what you call Hindu jhana and your experience of what you call Buddhist jhana.

Hi Freawaru

Right view is the four noble truths. You ask do I understand "by my own experience", if you mean have I heard this/contemplated this and understood this, then the answer is yes( as I assume the majority of sincere Buddhists would have done so also). Right view is the starting point, without it we are not following the path.

Are you really saying that you have to have considered the Dhamma before you have actually heard it?

Hatha yoga is one of the branches of hinduism.

You are assuming that the attainments taught to the Buddha were precipitated by the four jhanas (Buddhas jhanas). This is not stated, I see no reason to presume they did. In fact the Buddhas memory of first jhana was when he was a young boy, this itself is suggestive. The attainments taught to the Buddha, have philosophical bases - this itself is wrong view. Right view underpins the jhanas - re:- 8 fold path. It is easily conceivable that an attainment like the base of nothingness can be achieved without the four jhanas.

I dont know if it is right to describe my own personal experiences in meditation.

The differences would appear to be that "Hindu jhana" is overpowering and all consuming, where no discernment is possible (like your body/mind are totally absorbed until the energy propelling one into that type of concentration is used up. No awareness of body is maintained.
The "Buddhas jhana" is increasing awareness of body & mind, culminating in perfect sati (fourth jhana)/satipatthana. One only has to read the similes for jhana, to gain an idea of the process.

Brizzy

[Freawaru]

Hi Brizzi

Right view is the four noble truths. You ask do I understand "by my own experience", if you mean have I heard this/contemplated this and understood this, then the answer is yes( as I assume the majority of sincere Buddhists would have done so also). Right view is the starting point, without it we are not following the path.

So you are saying that you already understand what the Buddha took so long to understand? Understanding the four noble truths is a synonym for Enlightenment.

Are you really saying that you have to have considered the Dhamma before you have actually heard it?

I am saying that "wise consideration" yoniso manasikara is a requirement for Right View. Yoniso manasikara arises from sati-sampajanna. There is no wise consideration without wisdom - so, yes, wisdom has to be developed before "Hearing Dhamma" can have the right effect.

Hatha yoga is one of the branches of hinduism.

While description of it's experiences and stages of development are in sanskrit and based on the Hindu mythology (that isn't that different from the Buddhist, btw), in itself it is not a branch of Hinduism:

In this treatise Swatmarama introduces Hatha Yoga as preparatory stage of physical purification that the body practices for higher meditation. The Asanas and Pranayama in Raja Yoga were what the Hindu Yogis used to physically train their body for long periods of meditation. This practice is called shatkarma.
The word Hatha is a compound of the words Ha and Tha meaning sun and moon ( हकारः कीर्तितः सूर्यष्ठकारश्चंद्र उच्यते | सूर्यचंद्रमसोर्योगाद्धठयोग निगद्यते || ), referring to Praana and Apaana, and also to the principal nadis (energy channels) of the subtle body that must be fully operational to attain a state of dhyana or samādhi.
Yoga means to yoke, or to join two things together, hence hatha yoga is meant to join together sun (masculine, active) energy with the moon (feminine, receptive) energy, thus producing balance and greater power in an individual.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hatha_yoga

Hatha yoga leads to the jhanas, the elements, the iddhis (siddhis).

You are assuming that the attainments taught to the Buddha were precipitated by the four jhanas (Buddhas jhanas). This is not stated, I see no reason to presume they did. In fact the Buddhas memory of first jhana was when he was a young boy, this itself is suggestive.

Many people experience the first jhana naturally, due to kamma of previous lives. There is nothing unusual about this.

It is easily conceivable that an attainment like the base of nothingness can be achieved without the four jhanas.

Are you speaking about your own experience of the base of nothingness here?

I dont know if it is right to describe my own personal experiences in meditation.

It is. If you want to further communicate with me you will have to. For I can't read your mind. Without knowing your experiences I cannot talk to you and explain to you what I mean. You won't understand what I write.

The differences would appear to be that "Hindu jhana" is overpowering and all consuming, where no discernment is possible (like your body/mind are totally absorbed until the energy propelling one into that type of concentration is used up. No awareness of body is maintained.

This is not so. One can control the jhanas, master them, enter and leave them at will. How could this be possible without awareness?

The "Buddhas jhana" is increasing awareness of body & mind, culminating in perfect sati (fourth jhana)/satipatthana. One only has to read the similes for jhana, to gain an idea of the process.

Yes, and it is identical to the Hindu one.

Freawaru, are you implying that Arahants have sex or engage in sexual activity. The Buddha states in one of the suttas that craving can be overcome by craving and conceit by conceit etc. However in regard to the sexual act the Blessed One has advised the destruction of the bridge.http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka ... .than.html

Yes, and he clearly didn't mean it in it's biological sense. The sequence is: abandonment of food, then craving, then conceit, and then "sex"??? How much sense does this make?

If you want to read the Buddhas explanation of celibacy it is found here :- AN 7 47, the sutta actually mentions coitus in regard to celibacy.

How odd. I assumed that coitus is latin (literal meaning: unification) and not Pali.

Celibacy is to be celibate regarding the sexual act and sexual activity.

I see no prove in either sutta.

You mentioned this:

The "Buddhas jhana" is increasing awareness of body & mind, culminating in perfect sati (fourth jhana)/satipatthana.

and we agree on this one. Do you really want to understand why I am sure that terms such as sex, celibacy, male and female, bhikkhu and bhikkhuni, don't refer to biology or society? If yes, answer me these questions, you don't have to write any personal information if you don't want to, just general answers to the general questions:

1) When you concentrate on something you like, whether this is a hobby, work, a movie or book, or reading and thinking about the suttas - do you sometimes find it difficult to "get out" of this activity. I mean, do thoughts about it linger, say, you want to drive the car but thinking about the suttas still keeps on going on it's own?

2) When you concentrate on something you like, whether this is a hobby, work, a movie or book, or reading and thinking about the suttas - do you sometimes loose the sense of time? Does it happen that you wanted to spend just a certain amount of time on it but when you finally remember to look at the watch it is much later than you expect it to be?

3) When you concentrate on something you like, whether this is a hobby, work, a movie or book, or reading and thinking about the suttas - does it sometimes happen that after emerging from it you find yourself noticing rather suddenly that you are actually hungry or thirsty, that there is physical pain, as if those had not been there while you had been engaged in that activity?

4) When you concentrate on something you like, whether this is a hobby, work, a movie or book, or reading and thinking about the suttas - does it sometimes happen that without stopping it and while still focused on that activity you find yourself noticing that you are not hungry or thirsty, that any physical pain you have felt before (say, you are ill and now watch a good movie) is absent, that you loose your sense of time and everything that is not required for the activity?

[Brizzy]

Hi Freawaru

Hi Brizzi

Right view is the four noble truths. You ask do I understand "by my own experience", if you mean have I heard this/contemplated this and understood this, then the answer is yes( as I assume the majority of sincere Buddhists would have done so also). Right view is the starting point, without it we are not following the path.

So you are saying that you already understand what the Buddha took so long to understand? Understanding the four noble truths is a synonym for Enlightenment.
Penetrating the four noble truths is the synonym.

Are you really saying that you have to have considered the Dhamma before you have actually heard it?

I am saying that "wise consideration" yoniso manasikara is a requirement for Right View. Yoniso manasikara arises from sati-sampajanna. There is no wise consideration without wisdom - so, yes, wisdom has to be developed before "Hearing Dhamma" can have the right effect.
You can only consider what you have heard.

Hatha yoga is one of the branches of hinduism.

While description of it's experiences and stages of development are in sanskrit and based on the Hindu mythology (that isn't that different from the Buddhist, btw), in itself it is not a branch of Hinduism:
I am sorry I dont understand. If its experiences & stages are based on Hinduism, then does it not make it Hinduism.

In this treatise Swatmarama introduces Hatha Yoga as preparatory stage of physical purification that the body practices for higher meditation. The Asanas and Pranayama in Raja Yoga were what the Hindu Yogis used to physically train their body for long periods of meditation. This practice is called shatkarma.
The word Hatha is a compound of the words Ha and Tha meaning sun and moon ( हकारः कीर्तितः सूर्यष्ठकारश्चंद्र उच्यते | सूर्यचंद्रमसोर्योगाद्धठयोग निगद्यते || ), referring to Praana and Apaana, and also to the principal nadis (energy channels) of the subtle body that must be fully operational to attain a state of dhyana or samādhi.
Yoga means to yoke, or to join two things together, hence hatha yoga is meant to join together sun (masculine, active) energy with the moon (feminine, receptive) energy, thus producing balance and greater power in an individual.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hatha_yoga

Hatha yoga leads to the jhanas, the elements, the iddhis (siddhis).

You are assuming that the attainments taught to the Buddha were precipitated by the four jhanas (Buddhas jhanas). This is not stated, I see no reason to presume they did. In fact the Buddhas memory of first jhana was when he was a young boy, this itself is suggestive.

Many people experience the first jhana naturally, due to kamma of previous lives. There is nothing unusual about this.

It is easily conceivable that an attainment like the base of nothingness can be achieved without the four jhanas.

Are you speaking about your own experience of the base of nothingness here?

I dont know if it is right to describe my own personal experiences in meditation.

It is. If you want to further communicate with me you will have to. For I can't read your mind. Without knowing your experiences I cannot talk to you and explain to you what I mean. You won't understand what I write.

The differences would appear to be that "Hindu jhana" is overpowering and all consuming, where no discernment is possible (like your body/mind are totally absorbed until the energy propelling one into that type of concentration is used up. No awareness of body is maintained.

This is not so. One can control the jhanas, master them, enter and leave them at will. How could this be possible without awareness?
Is this experience of "Absorption" meditation from your own experience?

The "Buddhas jhana" is increasing awareness of body & mind, culminating in perfect sati (fourth jhana)/satipatthana. One only has to read the similes for jhana, to gain an idea of the process.

Yes, and it is identical to the Hindu one.
I see. If that is the case then Right samadhi is found in Hinduism! Right samadhi is based on the other 7 factors of the path & is not found in any other dispensation outside of the Buddhas.

Freawaru, are you implying that Arahants have sex or engage in sexual activity. The Buddha states in one of the suttas that craving can be overcome by craving and conceit by conceit etc. However in regard to the sexual act the Blessed One has advised the destruction of the bridge.http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka ... .than.html

Yes, and he clearly didn't mean it in it's biological sense. The sequence is: abandonment of food, then craving, then conceit, and then "sex"??? How much sense does this make?
I do not understand what point you are making.

If you want to read the Buddhas explanation of celibacy it is found here :- AN 7 47, the sutta actually mentions coitus in regard to celibacy.

How odd. I assumed that coitus is latin (literal meaning: unification) and not Pali.

Celibacy is to be celibate regarding the sexual act and sexual activity.

I see no prove in either sutta.
How can you not see the proof in AN 7 47. The Buddha actually describes different levels of sexual activity. It is absurd to think the Buddha was discussing anything other than sex.
You mentioned this:

The "Buddhas jhana" is increasing awareness of body & mind, culminating in perfect sati (fourth jhana)/satipatthana.

and we agree on this one. Do you really want to understand why I am sure that terms such as sex, celibacy, male and female, bhikkhu and bhikkhuni, don't refer to biology or society? If yes, answer me these questions, you don't have to write any personal information if you don't want to, just general answers to the general questions:

1) When you concentrate on something you like, whether this is a hobby, work, a movie or book, or reading and thinking about the suttas - do you sometimes find it difficult to "get out" of this activity. I mean, do thoughts about it linger, say, you want to drive the car but thinking about the suttas still keeps on going on it's own?

2) When you concentrate on something you like, whether this is a hobby, work, a movie or book, or reading and thinking about the suttas - do you sometimes loose the sense of time? Does it happen that you wanted to spend just a certain amount of time on it but when you finally remember to look at the watch it is much later than you expect it to be?

3) When you concentrate on something you like, whether this is a hobby, work, a movie or book, or reading and thinking about the suttas - does it sometimes happen that after emerging from it you find yourself noticing rather suddenly that you are actually hungry or thirsty, that there is physical pain, as if those had not been there while you had been engaged in that activity?

4) When you concentrate on something you like, whether this is a hobby, work, a movie or book, or reading and thinking about the suttas - does it sometimes happen that without stopping it and while still focused on that activity you find yourself noticing that you are not hungry or thirsty, that any physical pain you have felt before (say, you are ill and now watch a good movie) is absent, that you loose your sense of time and everything that is not required for the activity?

I will not answer these questions freawaru, because I do not wish to "want to understand why I am sure that terms such as sex, celibacy, male and female, bhikkhu and bhikkhuni, don't refer to biology or society"
The Buddha taught Dhamma with an open hand and there is no esoteric teaching in his dispensation.

[Freawaru]

Hi Brizzy,

I do not understand what point you are making.

And - as you said - neither are you interested in it. So I am ending this communication.

[Alex123]

Hello Brizzy,

While the Buddha doesn't to my knowledge say "This is vipassana practice..." , He does seem often to indirectly refer to insight practice .

SN35.165 (10) Abandoning Wrong View
Then a certain bhikkhu approached the Blessed One … and said to him: “Venerable sir, how should one know, how should one see, for wrong view to be abandoned?

Bhikkhu, when one knows and sees the eye as impermanent, wrong view is abandoned. When one knows and sees forms as impermanent … eye-consciousness as impermanent … eye-contact as impermanent … whatever feeling arises with mind-contact as condition … as impermanent, wrong view is abandoned. It is when one knows and sees thus that wrong view is abandoned."

Same for abandoning of self view SN35.166-167

Abandoning of wrong views doesn't require the "a whole bunch of books" approach. A thorough anicca meditation can do that.

Ignorance needs to be abandoned. And how? By knowing and seeing faculties as impermanent
"Ignorance, bhikkhu, is that one thing through the abandoning of which ignorance is abandoned by a bhikkhu and true knowledge arises.

Bhikkhu, when a bhikkhu knows and sees the eye as impermanent, ignorance is abandoned by him and true knowledge arises. When he knows and sees forms as impermanent. When he knows and sees as impermanent whatever feeling arises with mind-contact as condition … ignorance is abandoned by him and true knowledge arises." - SN35.79(6) BB translation.

"If a monk, while keeping track of arising & passing away with regard to the eye-faculty, becomes disenchanted with the eye-faculty; if, while keeping track of arising & passing away with regard to the ear-faculty... the nose-faculty... the tongue-faculty... the body faculty... the intellect-faculty, he becomes disenchanted with the intellect-faculty; and, disenchanted, he becomes dispassionate; through dispassion, he is fully released; with full release, there is the knowledge, 'Fully released'; he discerns that 'Birth is depleted, the holy life fulfilled, the task done. There is nothing further for this world,' it is to this extent that one is consummate in faculties."
http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka ... .than.html

I am sure that Mahasi or Goenka like practice may heve been implied above. There are many passages in SN that could be interpreted as "labeling" of some sort.


"when a bhikkhu knows and sees the eye as impermanent..." , here it may be implied that one labels the eye [and others] as "as impermanent". And satipatthana sutta may imply labeling...

Just few thoughts...

IMHO.


With metta,

Alex

[Brizzy]

Hello Brizzy,

While the Buddha doesn't to my knowledge say "This is vipassana practice..." , He does seem often to indirectly refer to insight practice .

SN35.165 (10) Abandoning Wrong View
Then a certain bhikkhu approached the Blessed One … and said to him: “Venerable sir, how should one know, how should one see, for wrong view to be abandoned?

Bhikkhu, when one knows and sees the eye as impermanent, wrong view is abandoned. When one knows and sees forms as impermanent … eye-consciousness as impermanent … eye-contact as impermanent … whatever feeling arises with mind-contact as condition … as impermanent, wrong view is abandoned. It is when one knows and sees thus that wrong view is abandoned."

Same for abandoning of self view SN35.166-167

Abandoning of wrong views doesn't require the "a whole bunch of books" approach. A thorough anicca meditation can do that.

Ignorance needs to be abandoned. And how? By knowing and seeing faculties as impermanent
"Ignorance, bhikkhu, is that one thing through the abandoning of which ignorance is abandoned by a bhikkhu and true knowledge arises.

Bhikkhu, when a bhikkhu knows and sees the eye as impermanent, ignorance is abandoned by him and true knowledge arises. When he knows and sees forms as impermanent. When he knows and sees as impermanent whatever feeling arises with mind-contact as condition … ignorance is abandoned by him and true knowledge arises." - SN35.79(6) BB translation.

"If a monk, while keeping track of arising & passing away with regard to the eye-faculty, becomes disenchanted with the eye-faculty; if, while keeping track of arising & passing away with regard to the ear-faculty... the nose-faculty... the tongue-faculty... the body faculty... the intellect-faculty, he becomes disenchanted with the intellect-faculty; and, disenchanted, he becomes dispassionate; through dispassion, he is fully released; with full release, there is the knowledge, 'Fully released'; he discerns that 'Birth is depleted, the holy life fulfilled, the task done. There is nothing further for this world,' it is to this extent that one is consummate in faculties."
http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka ... .than.html

I am sure that Mahasi or Goenka like practice may heve been implied above. There are many passages in SN that could be interpreted as "labeling" of some sort.


"when a bhikkhu knows and sees the eye as impermanent..." , here it may be implied that one labels the eye [and others] as "as impermanent". And satipatthana sutta may imply labeling...

Just few thoughts...

IMHO.


With metta,

Alex

Hi

If one was to recollect that they were once a child - and that they will surely die - and all the change in between. Is this not knowing and seeing anicca of the senses/aggregates etc .- its rising/passing away and its subject to change? Investigating the conditions for their arising/passing, is the second of the enlightenment factors. No"special" practice is indicated. If one one is following these special vipassana practices, how is one actually knowing & seeing the eye as impermanent? If one is labeling a certain thing, how is this being aware of its origin, change and cessation?
The buddha gave a wide range of recollections(sati) that could be used regarding the body e.g. parts of the body, cemetery, food etc. A large part of the myriad of suttas the Buddha taught are all ways & means for the arising of the enlightenment factors. Even the "perception" of the not self, is a practice to be thought through/recollected/perceived. The perception of Dukkha, does not mean one has to generate pain, before one can know & see the characteristic of Dukkha.
I know I am rambling, but it is hard sometimes to express what one actually means. That is why the four Nikayas are so precious, the Buddha taught them so clearly.:-

http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/an/an05/an05.057.than.html
http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/mn/mn.101.than.html
http://www.cambodianbuddhist.org/english/website/canon/sutta/anguttara/an05-176.html

The first & last suttas are two of the very few occassions that the Buddha got specific about a laypersons formal meditation.

[Virgo]

When your beard grows, do you tell each hair to grow?

[Brizzy]

When your beard grows, do you tell each hair to grow?

?

[BlackBird]

10.8 "There are here, O monks, some foolish men who study the Teaching; having studied it, they do not wisely examine the purpose of those teachings. To those who do not wisely examine the purpose, these teachings will not yield insight. They study the Teaching only to use it for criticizing or for refuting others in disputation. They do not experience the (true) purpose for which they (ought to) study the Teaching. To them these teachings wrongly grasped, will bring harm and suffering for a long time. And why? Because of their wrong grasp of the teachings.

"Suppose, monks, a man wants a snake, looks for a snake, goes in search of a snake. He then sees a large snake, and when he is grasping its body or its tail, the snake turns back on him and bites his hand or arm or some other limb of his. And because of that he suffers death or deadly pain. And why? Because of his wrong grasp of the snake.

"Similarly, O monks, there are here some foolish men who study the Teaching; having studied it, they do not wisely examine the purpose of those teachings. To those who do not wisely examine the purpose, these teachings will not yield insight. They study the Teaching only to use it for criticizing or for refuting others in disputation. They do not experience the (true) purpose for which they (ought to) study the Teaching. To them these teachings wrongly grasped, will bring harm and suffering for a long time. And why? Because of their wrong grasp of the teachings.

- MN 22

[Brizzy]

10.8 "There are here, O monks, some foolish men who study the Teaching; having studied it, they do not wisely examine the purpose of those teachings. To those who do not wisely examine the purpose, these teachings will not yield insight. They study the Teaching only to use it for criticizing or for refuting others in disputation. They do not experience the (true) purpose for which they (ought to) study the Teaching. To them these teachings wrongly grasped, will bring harm and suffering for a long time. And why? Because of their wrong grasp of the teachings.

"Suppose, monks, a man wants a snake, looks for a snake, goes in search of a snake. He then sees a large snake, and when he is grasping its body or its tail, the snake turns back on him and bites his hand or arm or some other limb of his. And because of that he suffers death or deadly pain. And why? Because of his wrong grasp of the snake.

"Similarly, O monks, there are here some foolish men who study the Teaching; having studied it, they do not wisely examine the purpose of those teachings. To those who do not wisely examine the purpose, these teachings will not yield insight. They study the Teaching only to use it for criticizing or for refuting others in disputation. They do not experience the (true) purpose for which they (ought to) study the Teaching. To them these teachings wrongly grasped, will bring harm and suffering for a long time. And why? Because of their wrong grasp of the teachings.

- MN 22

Well said

It might have also included, how people will give prominence to teachings that are not from the Buddha.

[BlackBird]

It might have also included...

[Alex123]

When your beard grows, do you tell each hair to grow?

You allow it to grow by not shaving it. You feed the body with nutrients, part of which are responcible for beard to grow.

So you do set conditions for it to grow.

[rowyourboat]

AN 4.94 PTS: A ii 93
Samadhi Sutta: Concentration (Tranquillity and Insight)
translated from the Pali by
Thanissaro Bhikkhu
© 1998–2010
"Monks, these four types of individuals are to be found existing in the world. Which four?

"There is the case of the individual who has attained internal tranquillity of awareness (samatha), but not insight into phenomena through heightened discernment (vipassana). Then there is the case of the individual who has attained insight into phenomena through heightened discernment, but not internal tranquillity of awareness. Then there is the case of the individual who has attained neither internal tranquillity of awareness nor insight into phenomena through heightened discernment. And then there is the case of the individual who has attained both internal tranquillity of awareness & insight into phenomena through heightened discernment.

"The individual who has attained internal tranquillity of awareness, but not insight into phenomena through heightened discernment, should approach an individual who has attained insight into phenomena through heightened discernment and ask him: 'How should fabrications be regarded? How should they be investigated? How should they be seen with insight?' The other will answer in line with what he has seen & experienced: 'Fabrications should be regarded in this way. Fabrications should be investigated in this way. Fabrications should be seen in this way with insight.' Then eventually he [the first] will become one who has attained both internal tranquillity of awareness & insight into phenomena through heightened discernment.

"As for the individual who has attained insight into phenomena through heightened discernment, but not internal tranquillity of awareness, he should approach an individual who has attained internal tranquillity of awareness... and ask him, 'How should the mind be steadied? How should it be made to settle down? How should it be unified? How should it be concentrated?' The other will answer in line with what he has seen & experienced: 'The mind should be steadied in this way. The mind should be made to settle down in this way. The mind should be unified in this way. The mind should be concentrated in this way.' Then eventually he [the first] will become one who has attained both internal tranquillity of awareness & insight into phenomena through heightened discernment.

"As for the individual who has attained neither internal tranquillity of awareness nor insight into phenomena through heightened discernment, he should approach an individual who has attained both internal tranquillity of awareness & insight into phenomena through heightened discernment... and ask him, 'How should the mind be steadied? How should it be made to settle down? How should it be unified? How should it be concentrated? How should fabrications be regarded? How should they be investigated? How should they be seen with insight?' The other will answer in line with what he has seen & experienced: 'The mind should be steadied in this way. The mind should be made to settle down in this way. The mind should be unified in this way. The mind should be concentrated in this way. Fabrications should be regarded in this way. Fabrications should be investigated in this way. Fabrications should be seen in this way with insight.' Then eventually he [the first] will become one who has attained both internal tranquillity of awareness & insight into phenomena through heightened discernment.

"As for the individual who has attained both internal tranquillity of awareness & insight into phenomena through heightened discernment, his duty is to make an effort in establishing ('tuning') those very same skillful qualities to a higher degree for the ending of the (mental) fermentations.

"These are four types of individuals to be found existing in the world."
http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka ... .than.html

[Brizzy]

AN 4.94 PTS: A ii 93
Samadhi Sutta: Concentration (Tranquillity and Insight)
translated from the Pali by
Thanissaro Bhikkhu
© 1998–2010
"Monks, these four types of individuals are to be found existing in the world. Which four?......

http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka ... .than.html

I am not disputing the four types of individuals to be found in the world.....merely the esoteric/tantric practices that have developed. If the Buddha says to sati (recollect) on certain things (foundations), I dont know why people have to invent elaborate techniques, when the obvious is staring them in the face. The Buddha never felt it necessary to elaborate such practices, but a lot of people it appears to me, must see the Buddha as an inadequate teacher. My eyes roll to heaven when I hear/read people, repeatedly saying that such techniques were widely known at the time or that such techniques were handed down, through the ages! The Buddha was the supreme Teacher, and everything and anything that we need to know to escape sufferring, has been taught by the Buddha. To suggest that the Buddha left anything out, is to pander to modern or post sutta/vinaya thinking. The whole of the Theravadin sangha could say one thing - if it disagreed with the suttas, I know which teaching I would follow. People object "that is your understanding of the suttas" but in all honesty the majority of suttas are very straightforward. It is only the commentaries & later developments, that try to make them obscure.

As regards a lay persons practice (which I assume the majority here are), the Buddha rarely touched on specific times put aside for meditation, as I recollect one of the few times he did was here.....

http://www.cambodianbuddhist.org/english/website/canon/sutta/anguttara/an05-176.html......Jhana?

And as a follow up to this, here.......

http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/an/an05/an05.057.than.html........Vipassana?

You could be a devil and combine the two.