Ajahn Sucitto: Fragmentation & Distancing from Experience

A discussion on all aspects of Theravāda Buddhism
nathan
Posts: 692
Joined: Sat Feb 07, 2009 3:11 am

Re: Ajahn Sucitto: Fragmentation & Distancing from Experience

Post by nathan »

It's actually very straightforward Tilt. In the morning practice you take the ground of being and dump a couple large spoon fulls in a beaker. Then you pour hot water on it. Once the luminous mind has been distilled from it you dump the ground of emptiness into the compost. It is a very popular contribution to wakefulness for many practitioners.
:rofl:
But whoever walking, standing, sitting, or lying down overcomes thought, delighting in the stilling of thought: he's capable, a monk like this, of touching superlative self-awakening. § 110. {Iti 4.11; Iti 115}
User avatar
tiltbillings
Posts: 23046
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2008 9:25 am

Re: Ajahn Sucitto: Fragmentation & Distancing from Experience

Post by tiltbillings »

nathan wrote:It's actually very straightforward Tilt. In the morning practice you take the ground of being and dump a couple large spoon fulls in a beaker. Then you pour hot water on it. Once the luminous mind has been distilled from it you dump the ground of emptiness into the compost. It is a very popular contribution to wakefulness for many practitioners.
If I knew anything about coffee (horrible stuff), I am sure I could expand on this already very good funny bit, but since it is better than anything I could come up with, I doff my hat to you.
>> Do you see a man wise [enlightened/ariya] in his own eyes? There is more hope for a fool than for him.<< -- Proverbs 26:12

This being is bound to samsara, kamma is his means for going beyond. -- SN I, 38.

“Of course it is happening inside your head, Harry, but why on earth should that mean that it is not real?” HPatDH p.723
User avatar
ground
Posts: 2591
Joined: Wed Nov 25, 2009 6:01 am

Re: Ajahn Sucitto: Fragmentation & Distancing from Experience

Post by ground »

m0rl0ck wrote:
christopher::: wrote: Either that or he had some closet Zen training...

:tongue:
Or he could be speaking from actual experience. ?
And/or - which is more likely considering the term he applies - he is inspired by Dzogchen teachings :tongue:
User avatar
tiltbillings
Posts: 23046
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2008 9:25 am

Re: Ajahn Sucitto: Fragmentation & Distancing from Experience

Post by tiltbillings »

TMingyur wrote:
m0rl0ck wrote:
christopher::: wrote: Either that or he had some closet Zen training...

:tongue:
Or he could be speaking from actual experience. ?
And/or - which is more likely considering the term he applies - he is inspired by Dzogchen teachings :tongue:
Which only adds a layer of confusion to what is a very clear teaching by the Buddha.
>> Do you see a man wise [enlightened/ariya] in his own eyes? There is more hope for a fool than for him.<< -- Proverbs 26:12

This being is bound to samsara, kamma is his means for going beyond. -- SN I, 38.

“Of course it is happening inside your head, Harry, but why on earth should that mean that it is not real?” HPatDH p.723
Paññāsikhara
Posts: 980
Joined: Wed Oct 14, 2009 5:27 am
Contact:

Re: Ajahn Sucitto: Fragmentation & Distancing from Experience

Post by Paññāsikhara »

I wonder how the transcriber of the talk knew that "Ground of Being" had a capital "G" and a capital "B"?
My recently moved Blog, containing some of my writings on the Buddha Dhamma, as well as a number of translations from classical Buddhist texts and modern authors, liturgy, etc.: Huifeng's Prajnacara Blog.
User avatar
tiltbillings
Posts: 23046
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2008 9:25 am

Re: Ajahn Sucitto: Fragmentation & Distancing from Experience

Post by tiltbillings »

Paññāsikhara wrote:I wonder how the transcriber of the talk knew that "Ground of Being" had a capital "G" and a capital "B"?
I am not sure it really matters. It is a sloppy use of language. Either way, it is suggestive of something not really taught by the Theravada. And even if this is an idiosyncratic way of talking about something such as the seven factors of awakening, it is still sloppy use of language.

Of interest:
How would you respond to those who say they get a sense of oneness with the universe when they meditate, that they're interconnected to all things, and that it relieves a lot of suffering?
How stable is that feeling of oneness? When you feel like you've come to the stable ground of being from which all things emanate, the suttas ask you to question whether you're simply reading that feeling into your experience. If the ground of being were really stable, how would it give rise to the unstable world we live in? So whatever it is you're experiencing-it may be one of the formless states-it's not the ultimate answer to suffering.
- Ven Thanissaro
>> Do you see a man wise [enlightened/ariya] in his own eyes? There is more hope for a fool than for him.<< -- Proverbs 26:12

This being is bound to samsara, kamma is his means for going beyond. -- SN I, 38.

“Of course it is happening inside your head, Harry, but why on earth should that mean that it is not real?” HPatDH p.723
User avatar
christopher:::
Posts: 1327
Joined: Thu Jan 01, 2009 12:56 am

Re: Ajahn Sucitto: Fragmentation & Distancing from Experience

Post by christopher::: »

tiltbillings wrote: I am not sure it really matters. It is a sloppy use of language. Either way, it is suggestive of something not really taught by the Theravada. And even if this is an idiosyncratic way of talking about something such as the seven factors of awakening, it is still sloppy use of language.
Well, definitely Ajahn Sucitto's dharma talks are not going to be your cup of tea then, Tilt. Which is one of the reasons i started this conversation in the "Theravada for the Modern World" forum.
Paññāsikhara wrote:I wonder how the transcriber of the talk knew that "Ground of Being" had a capital "G" and a capital "B"?
Apologies, Venerable... that was my transcription, there were no instructions for capitalization spoken in Ajahn's voice. He may have not meant for the term to be emphasized that way...
imagemarie wrote:
PeterB wrote:Ajahn Sucitto is of an age where he may well have witnessed the TV debate between a well known at the time Anglican Bishop John Robinson, who had published a book that year called Honest To God, which made extensive use of the term "Ground of Being"... and Sangharakshita.
More speculation, I know, but I notice Ven Sucitto had an interest in English Lit in his youth. Perhaps he read Huxley then, and "The Perennial Philosophy". The second chapter is called The Nature of The Ground, with quotes from Eckhart, the Upanishads, and references the Clear Light from The Tibetan Book of the Dead.
I enjoyed parts of the talk, whilst being a little confused by the emphasis upon having "something" to hold onto, before letting go is possible. A "resting place"?

"If anicca is the only truth, then we're looking at something quite terrifying"..

Still, I liked the idea of "You've been anicca-'d!"..which sounded to me a bit like Zen sickness.
I'll give it another listen - thanks Christopher :smile:
Thanks for checking his talk out, marie.

You could be right about Ajahn reading Huxley. The Vipassana teacher Joseph Goldstein is also a big reader and sometimes quotes from Non-Theravadan sources such as Ralph Waldo Emerson, Zen & Dzogchen teachers and even (gasp) Advaita mystics...

:o

But Goldstein's a good teacher, respected by many (including Tilt). Why is that? Seems to me that it's hard to make judgments about teachers based on small snapshots (from a distance) of the language they use to present the dhamma.

:juggling:
"As Buddhists, we should aim to develop relationships that are not predominated by grasping and clinging. Our relationships should be characterised by the brahmaviharas of metta (loving kindness), mudita (sympathetic joy), karuna (compassion), and upekkha (equanimity)."
~post by Ben, Jul 02, 2009
User avatar
tiltbillings
Posts: 23046
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2008 9:25 am

Re: Ajahn Sucitto: Fragmentation & Distancing from Experience

Post by tiltbillings »

christopher::: wrote:
You could be right about Ajahn reading Huxley. The Vipassana teacher Joseph Goldstein (who is more Tilt's cup of tea) is also a big reader and often quotes from Non-Theravadan sources such as Ralph Waldo Emerson, Zen & Dzogchen teachers and even (gasp) Advaita mystics...

:o

But Goldstein's a good teacher, respected by many. Why is that? Seems to me that it's hard to make judgments about teachers based on small snapshots (from a distance) of the language they use to present the dhamma.
Goldstein does not muddy things up the way Ven Sucitto does. I have listened to a couple other talks Ven Sucitto a few years ago. Nothing that has not been said better by others was my opinion then and now.
>> Do you see a man wise [enlightened/ariya] in his own eyes? There is more hope for a fool than for him.<< -- Proverbs 26:12

This being is bound to samsara, kamma is his means for going beyond. -- SN I, 38.

“Of course it is happening inside your head, Harry, but why on earth should that mean that it is not real?” HPatDH p.723
User avatar
christopher:::
Posts: 1327
Joined: Thu Jan 01, 2009 12:56 am

Re: Ajahn Sucitto: Fragmentation & Distancing from Experience

Post by christopher::: »

cooran wrote:Hello all,

The Translators' introduction by Thanissaro Bhikkhu to MN 1 Mulapariyaya Sutta: The Root Sequence might provide food for thought about "the ground of all being".
http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka ... .than.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

with metta
Chris
Thanks, Chris. Excellent food for thought. From your link...
"The Buddha taught that clinging to views is one of the four forms of clinging that tie the mind to the processes of suffering. He thus recommended that his followers relinquish their clinging, not only to views in their full-blown form as specific positions, but also in their rudimentary form as the categories & relationships that the mind reads into experience."
This also appears to be related to the point Ajahn Sucitto was making in the OP, imo, in regards to the fragmentation of experience, behavioral dualism and our clinging to opinions and views.

~*~
tiltbillings wrote: Goldstein does not muddy things up the way Ven Sucitto does. I have listened to a couple other talks Ven Sucitto a few years ago. Nothing that has not been said better by others was my opinion then and now.
Well, although we may disagree presently i appreciate your input, Tilt. I've benefited greatly from Goldstein and Thanissaro's dhamma talks and writing, so it's not like i'm trying to put Ajahn Sucitto up on a pedestal.

I shared these ideas from his dhamma talk because i think he has some excellent insights into the process of "self" making, how without a calm equanimous "center" of some sort our minds give rise to strong attitudes and opinions. How cultivation of a mindful compassionate awareness helps us to unravel our sense of self- undo fetters and hindrances.

Countless excellent Dhamma teachers (beginning with the Buddha) have described this, certainly, how we get mired in the muck of "views, ideas, opinions, standpoints" that.. tend to become aspects of "My Self." This is a kind of "muddiness" of mind that many of us are still prone to creating, imo.

It's something that happens to (or gives rise to?) fictional "me" anyway.

:toilet:
"As Buddhists, we should aim to develop relationships that are not predominated by grasping and clinging. Our relationships should be characterised by the brahmaviharas of metta (loving kindness), mudita (sympathetic joy), karuna (compassion), and upekkha (equanimity)."
~post by Ben, Jul 02, 2009
User avatar
tiltbillings
Posts: 23046
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2008 9:25 am

Re: Ajahn Sucitto: Fragmentation & Distancing from Experience

Post by tiltbillings »

christopher wrote:I shared these ideas from his dhamma talk because i think he has some excellent insights into the process of "self" making, how without a calm equanimous "center" of some sort our minds give rise to strong attitudes and opinions. How cultivation of a mindful compassionate awareness helps us to unravel our sense of self- undo fetters and hindrances.

Countless excellent Dhamma teachers (beginning with the Buddha) have described this, certainly, how we get mired in the muck of "views, ideas, opinions, standpoints" that.. tend to become aspects of "My Self." This is a kind of "muddiness" of mind that many of us are still prone to creating, imo.
Where did the Buddha talk about "ground of being"? Why use a highly loaded set of expression that suggest something like an Atman? As I said other teachers have gotten to the point without the unskillful expressions of "ground of being" and the like with which Sucitto seem rather taken.
>> Do you see a man wise [enlightened/ariya] in his own eyes? There is more hope for a fool than for him.<< -- Proverbs 26:12

This being is bound to samsara, kamma is his means for going beyond. -- SN I, 38.

“Of course it is happening inside your head, Harry, but why on earth should that mean that it is not real?” HPatDH p.723
User avatar
bodom
Posts: 7215
Joined: Fri Jan 09, 2009 6:18 pm
Location: San Antonio, Texas

Re: Ajahn Sucitto: Fragmentation & Distancing from Experience

Post by bodom »

There are much more skilful Ajahns out there to listen to and who explain these concepts in a much simpler and straightforward manner than Ajahn Succitto imo. Though If you happen to find his talks inspiring and do not get sidetracked by his unusual terminology, then by all means continue to listen. :smile:

:anjali:
Liberation is the inevitable fruit of the path and is bound to blossom forth when there is steady and persistent practice. The only requirements for reaching the final goal are two: to start and to continue. If these requirements are met there is no doubt the goal will be attained. This is the Dhamma, the undeviating law.

- BB
User avatar
Goofaholix
Posts: 4015
Joined: Sun Nov 15, 2009 3:49 am
Location: New Zealand

Re: Ajahn Sucitto: Fragmentation & Distancing from Experience

Post by Goofaholix »

tiltbillings wrote:Where did the Buddha talk about "ground of being"? Why use a highly loaded set of expression that suggest something like an Atman? As I said other teachers have gotten to the point without the unskillful expressions of "ground of being" and the like with which Sucitto seem rather taken.
I'm sorry to hear it suggests "Atman" to you, but it doesn't to me.

He is talking about a state of calm as a ground of being and contrasting that with views, ideas, opinions, standpoints that are not shining, luminous, immaculate, suffusive but that tend to become aspects of "My Self.", ie he is talking about it as the opposite of Atman.

One can be, and one can be in a state of calm, without having to be a self.

I can see that language like this may confuse some people who have a compulsion to define, categorise, and file away information under "understood", however that isn't the way that we approach practice.

Ajahn Chah always encouraged his disciples to not prepare their dhamma talks rather, to get out of the way and just let the dhamma through, and talk from the heart. The consequence is that you end up with dhamma talks that may be sloppy in places, may not be very technical, but they can be inspiring. That's good enough for me.

I think there are several plain english terms that he could have used to describe a state of calm that carries the same meaning without using Theravada jargonese on one hand nor fluffy new ageisms on the other. However if one is open minded, having an old truth expressed in a different way can open up new layers of meaning and new fodder for contemplation.
Pronouns (no self / not self)
“Peace is within oneself to be found in the same place as agitation and suffering. It is not found in a forest or on a hilltop, nor is it given by a teacher. Where you experience suffering, you can also find freedom from suffering. Trying to run away from suffering is actually to run toward it.”
― Ajahn Chah
User avatar
tiltbillings
Posts: 23046
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2008 9:25 am

Re: Ajahn Sucitto: Fragmentation & Distancing from Experience

Post by tiltbillings »

Goofaholix wrote:
tiltbillings wrote:Where did the Buddha talk about "ground of being"? Why use a highly loaded set of expression that suggest something like an Atman? As I said other teachers have gotten to the point without the unskillful expressions of "ground of being" and the like with which Sucitto seem rather taken.
I'm sorry to hear it suggests "Atman" to you, but it doesn't to me.
It is simply sloppy use of language on Ven Sucitto's part, and that is assuming his general thrust of understanding is in fact inline with the Buddha's teachings..
I think there are several plain english terms that he could have used to describe a state of calm that carries the same meaning without using Theravada jargonese on one hand nor fluffy new ageisms on the other. However if one is open minded, having an old truth expressed in a different way can open up new layers of meaning and new fodder for contemplation.
I am not open-minded because I find Sucitto's use of an expression - "ground of being" - qurestionable? I don't think so. Here are two links that illustrate the common usage of the expression of, and baggage carried by, the words "ground of being":
Ground of Being

One of the sophisticated concepts used by great Christian theologians is that of “The Ground of Being.” This concept indicates, not that God is the fact of things existing, but that God is the basis for the existence of all things. God is more fundamental to existing things than anything else. So fundamental to the existence of all things is God, that God can be thought of as the basis upon which things exist, the ground their being. To say that God is The ground of being or being itself, is to say that there is something we can sense that is so special about the nature of being that it hints at this fundamental reality upon which all else is based.
The Ground of Being

The ground of being is empty of everything. It is an objectless, spaceless, timeless, thoughtless void. But everything that exists has come from this no-place, including you and me. This empty ground that we all emerged from is the womb of the entire universe. When something came from nothing fourteen billion years ago, the nothing didn't disappear. That unborn, unmanifest dimension is the ever-present ground out of which everything is constantly arising.
There is no reason to introduce into Theravadin discourse this expression that carries baggage that from a Theravadin point of view is at very best highly problematic, if not simply wrong. It is very sloppy use of language. There are better teachers who are far more capable of expressing the Dhamma.
>> Do you see a man wise [enlightened/ariya] in his own eyes? There is more hope for a fool than for him.<< -- Proverbs 26:12

This being is bound to samsara, kamma is his means for going beyond. -- SN I, 38.

“Of course it is happening inside your head, Harry, but why on earth should that mean that it is not real?” HPatDH p.723
User avatar
christopher:::
Posts: 1327
Joined: Thu Jan 01, 2009 12:56 am

Re: Ajahn Sucitto: Fragmentation & Distancing from Experience

Post by christopher::: »

Goofaholix wrote: He is talking about a state of calm as a ground of being and contrasting that with views, ideas, opinions, standpoints that are not shining, luminous, immaculate, suffusive but that tend to become aspects of "My Self.", ie he is talking about it as the opposite of Atman.

One can be, and one can be in a state of calm, without having to be a self.

I can see that language like this may confuse some people who have a compulsion to define, categorise, and file away information under "understood", however that isn't the way that we approach practice.

Ajahn Chah always encouraged his disciples to not prepare their dhamma talks rather, to get out of the way and just let the dhamma through, and talk from the heart. The consequence is that you end up with dhamma talks that may be sloppy in places, may not be very technical, but they can be inspiring. That's good enough for me.


I think there are several plain english terms that he could have used to describe a state of calm that carries the same meaning without using Theravada jargonese on one hand nor fluffy new ageisms on the other. However if one is open minded, having an old truth expressed in a different way can open up new layers of meaning and new fodder for contemplation.
Thank you Goofaholix. I was told the same thing (bolded) by another long-term practitioner yesterday, familiar with Ajahn Sucitto and the instructions of Ajahn Chah.
tiltbillings wrote:
There is no reason to introduce into Theravadin discourse this expression that carries baggage that from a Theravadin point of view is at very best highly problematic, if not simply wrong. It is very sloppy use of language. There are better teachers who are far more capable of expressing the Dhamma.
Better teachers? Far more capable? That's quite a judgement call. There may be students (past and present) of Ajahn Sucitto here, people who have done retreats with him, know him. I would think they'd be in a better position to make assessments like that.

Your concerns about the "sloppy" language have been noted, but teachers (and teachings) are much more than that. Have you met him in person, talked with his students?

The key point he was making (concerning the arising of dualistic views, opinions) is being ignored, though in a sense exemplified.

Nuf said.

:computerproblem:
"As Buddhists, we should aim to develop relationships that are not predominated by grasping and clinging. Our relationships should be characterised by the brahmaviharas of metta (loving kindness), mudita (sympathetic joy), karuna (compassion), and upekkha (equanimity)."
~post by Ben, Jul 02, 2009
User avatar
tiltbillings
Posts: 23046
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2008 9:25 am

Re: Ajahn Sucitto: Fragmentation & Distancing from Experience

Post by tiltbillings »

christopher::: wrote:
Better teachers? Far more capable? That's quite a judgement call. There may be students (past and present) of Ajahn Sucitto here, people who have done retreats with him, know him. I would think they'd be in a better position to make assessments like that.
What does he mean by "ground of being?" I would prefer a teacher who better understands the language/concepts he is using, rather than trying to extract something out of a confused mishmash of concepts. There are teachers who are far better able to express the Dhamma than the quote you gave us.
Your concerns about the "sloppy" language have been noted, but teachers (and teachings) are much more than that. Have you met him in person, talked with his students?
You are the one who put out there this quotation by him that is at best confusing, using teminology that he himself seems to not understand. What he is like in other contexts is not the issue of the problem - the problem with which you have presented to us.
The key point of his talk that i raised here is being ignored, though in a sense exemplified. To pass judgments like this from a distance are...
Given that his use of non-Buddhist concepts is confused, what really is the point?
>> Do you see a man wise [enlightened/ariya] in his own eyes? There is more hope for a fool than for him.<< -- Proverbs 26:12

This being is bound to samsara, kamma is his means for going beyond. -- SN I, 38.

“Of course it is happening inside your head, Harry, but why on earth should that mean that it is not real?” HPatDH p.723
Locked