Samma samadhi: Sujin Boriharnwanaket

[Virgo]

The above post is more of your eel-wriggling. I have shown with quotations how the necessary soil and five purificaitons of the trunk are absent from Mahasi method, you have not shown how or where they are present. Give details as to how each one is present. You cannot, you will not, you will post again though, perhaps saying I haven't addressed retro yet, which I have, perhaps with some other lame excuse. It's exhausted now tilt, come to your sense. I see through you.

Kevin

[tiltbillings]

The above post is more of your eel-wriggling.

Not at all. You are simply being asked to formulate a reasonable, well constructed argument, which simply you have not done.

I have shown with quotations how the necessary soil and five purificaitons of the trunk are absent from Mahasi method,

You have quoted from the VM, but you have quoted nothing of direct relevance from Mahasi Sayadaw. On the other hand, Mike, and Fabian have neatly countered your ungrounded assertion about Mahasi Sayadaw with stuff directly from Mahasi Sayadaw, but rather than going through the quotes by Mike and Fabian to argue your point, you ignored them.

you have not shown how or where they are present.

It is not my job. It is yours, given that you are the one who claimed they are not there.

perhaps saying I haven't addressed retro yet, which I have, perhaps with some other lame excuse.

But you have not. His msg gets us beyond your obsession with the ritual of every jot and titte to the underlying teachings of Mahasi Sayadaw, which you are ignoring.

[mikenz66]

The instructions for meditation given by Mahasi Sayadaw are not complex. It is something one days over and over again. In brief, one notes all mental and physical phenomena in ones experience. The main object is the abdomen, and there are sencondary objects. Does any one deny this?

Yes, that's just the basic instructions for building mindfulness and concentration.

Between retreats I study and talk to my teachers in weekly group meetings, if there is a teacher around. So your comments about not having the proper preliminary knowledge are incorrect. During retreats I usually have good guidance from a teacher regarding how to contemplate what I am observing, how to deal with difficulties, and so on.

Of course, since there are thousands of teachers using this approach, various organisations will be more or less organised, and various yogis will have various backgrounds, it would be silly for me to argue that everyone out there is getting appropriate instruction. My Wat is not particularly organised and teachers come and go every year or two so I also would not claim that the instruction I have had is particularly well organised. One has to work with what is available.

Mike

[tiltbillings]

it would be silly for me to argue that everyone out there is getting appropriate instruction.

And , because it probably needs to be stated, one cannot generalize from the worst example to the whole.

[Virgo]

obsession with the ritual

Obsession or simply following the Classical Theravada Texts?

Quote Buddhaghosa:

while the five purifications, namely, purification of view, purification by
overcoming doubt, purification by knowledge and vision of what is the
path and what is not the path, purification by knowledge and vision of
the way, and purification by knowledge and vision, are the trunk. Consequently,
one who is perfecting these should first fortify his knowledge
by learning and questioning about those things that are the 'soil' after he
has perfected the two purifications that are the 'roots', then he can develop
the five purifications that are the 'trunk9. This is in brief.

[mikenz66]

Hi Kevin,

The "soil" is the study part. We already covered that many times over. Where did anyone say that one shouldn't study? I don't know any teacher who doesn't teach that material.

Of course the order and level of detail they cover will vary, but, as I keep saying, to me the Visuddhimagga is like a bunch of Dhamma talks organised into some sort of sequence. Not a thesis, or a detailed lesson plan.

Mike

[tiltbillings]

obsession with the ritual

Obsession or simply following the Classical Theravada Texts?

Actually, Fabian and Mike addressed this issue rather nicely, and as usual, you ignored what they said. Following the text is not a problem, but obsessive jot-and-tittle-ish adherence as a way of dismissing another position without acknowledging the spirit of the practice of the other is a problem, as you have shown.

[chandrafabian]

Dear Kevin,

Let me relates one story,
A Muslim woman once came in the monastery in Indonesia, to learn meditation.
In that monastery they are practicing Mahasi method.
First attempt the woman leave after three days
Second attempt, with strong determination, she could see her own thoughts, how it behave
how is the form, how it ceases etc.

Now please tell me I asked you again twice, have you seen this?
Do you think that muslim woman had learn aggregates, bases etc..?

In one of the sutta " a person who studied Dhamma, without realizing it is like a shepherd who counts other's sheep, not the owner of the sheep"
This sutta is brought by The Buddha because of one dispute between practitioner of Dhamma and theoreticians of Dhamma, The Buddha asked something related to theory to Theoreticians, they can answer well, but after The Buddha asked something relating to practicing experience, the Theoreticians unable to answer.
Only practitioner can answer.

Mettacittena,
fabian.

[tiltbillings]

Now please tell me I asked you again twice, have you seen this?
Do you think that muslim woman had learn aggregates, bases etc..?

Which is an important point that has been made before. The practice opens up the learning of these things in a way that a dry, book alone learning could never do.

[Virgo]

Now please tell me I asked you again twice, have you seen this?
Do you think that muslim woman had learn aggregates, bases etc..?

Which is an important point that has been made before. The practice opens up the learning of these things in a way that a dry, book alone learning could never do.

You know better than Buddhagosa.

Kevin

[Ben]

You know better than Buddhagosa.

No, that would be you.
You seem to think you know better than Mahasi, better than U Ba Khin, and the only person qualified to interpret Buddhaghosa. Kevin the uber-commentator. And you certainly think you know better than anyone else here.
And when you can't convince anyone you engage in circular argumentation.

[tiltbillings]

Now please tell me I asked you again twice, have you seen this?
Do you think that muslim woman had learn aggregates, bases etc..?

Which is an important point that has been made before. The practice opens up the learning of these things in a way that a dry, book alone learning could never do.

You know better than Buddhagosa.

We have been down that road, but then you never actually engaged the points raised that run counter to your point of view; rather, we get this snide sort of comment. The spirit of Buddhaghosa can be kept quite nicely, as has been pointed out, without a ritualistic obsession with a jot-and-tittle approach to what he taught. Mahasi Sayadaw and U Ba Khin have shown that very nicely in their teachings.

[Virgo]

You know better than Buddhagosa.

No, that would be you.
You seem to think you know better than Mahasi, better than U Ba Khin, and the only person qualified to interpret Buddhaghosa. Kevin the uber-commentator. And you certainly think you know better than anyone else here.
And when you can't convince anyone you engage in circular argumentation.

No. That would be Buddhghosa. And all I repeat is all what he says.

Take care,

Kevin

[tiltbillings]

No. That would be Buddhghosa. And all I repeat is all what he says.

Well, there is more to it than just the mere words.

[tiltbillings]

Have you attained the path of safety Tilt?

I would never be so stupid as to publicly make such a claim for myself. And what does this have to do with the discussion?

[Virgo]

Have you attained the path of safety Tilt?

I would never be so stupid as to publicly make such a claim for myself. And what does this have to do with the discussion?

The stupidity was on my part. You are correct about that . Absolutely. The stupid thing I did was to think that Buddhists would always be prudent, and that, even if they doubted, they would not make harsh statements in this direction *just in case*. Yet, I have been proved stupid, because all I see here is you making remarks in my direction which will cause you to make bad kamma. I am not lying. This is the truth. I swear on my two eyes.

Kevin F.

[retrofuturist]