"Secular Buddhists" answer to ven. Anālayo's ‘Superiority Conceit in Buddhist Traditions’

Exploring Theravāda's connections to other paths - what can we learn from other traditions, religions and philosophies?
User avatar
Kim OHara
Posts: 5584
Joined: Wed Dec 09, 2009 5:47 am
Location: North Queensland, Australia

Re: "Secular Buddhists" answer to ven. Anālayo's ‘Superiority Conceit in Buddhist Traditions’

Post by Kim OHara »

mikenz66 wrote: Fri Apr 02, 2021 10:01 pm
retrofuturist wrote: Fri Apr 02, 2021 1:31 am Greetings,
mikenz66 wrote: Fri Apr 02, 2021 1:22 am Without reading it all in detail, I did have the thought that it is a pity that there is not a chapter on "The conceit of the EBT approach".
Is it actually "conceit" to have the intention to follow the
actual Buddha's actual teachings? 🤔
Of course not.

It is clearly not easy to determine exactly which teachings are early, and how to understand them. If it were, there would not be so much discussion about some of the key points, here, and elsewhere. Therefore, it would be prudent to be sceptical of absolutist claims, as an absolutist might be suffering from "The conceit of the EBT approach".

:heart:
Mike
Indeed. Or the conceit of any other approach.
There's a sutra about that, if I remember correctly - something along the line of "anyone who claims that his dhamma alone is true and correct does not truly understand the dhamma."
Perhaps you could find it for us, Paul?

:namaste:
Kim
User avatar
Kim OHara
Posts: 5584
Joined: Wed Dec 09, 2009 5:47 am
Location: North Queensland, Australia

Re: "Secular Buddhists" answer to ven. Anālayo's ‘Superiority Conceit in Buddhist Traditions’

Post by Kim OHara »

retrofuturist wrote: Fri Apr 02, 2021 10:28 am Greetings,
Kim OHara wrote: Fri Apr 02, 2021 10:04 am In fact, I'm going to suggest that every single Buddhist in the last two thousand years has had an incorrect view of the Dhamma.
So no arya in the past two millennia according to Kim O'Hara.
I didn't say that and I wouldn't say that. Once again Retro News misreports Kim O'Hara.
Buddhism's over apparently, let's pack it in folks.
I didn't say that and I wouldn't say that. Once again Retro News misreports Kim O'Hara.

See my reply to Cappucino, a couple of posts back in the thread.

:coffee:
Kim
BVira
Posts: 169
Joined: Fri Nov 29, 2019 2:29 am

Re: "Secular Buddhists" answer to ven. Anālayo's ‘Superiority Conceit in Buddhist Traditions’

Post by BVira »

I don't usually see eye to eye with Analayo but I do find myself in agreement with the general idea that there isn't anything secular about the dhamma, and to try to "secularize" it is to miss the point entirely (which is lokuttara).

However, the dhamma is, in a sense, elitist, in that the Buddhas teaching is for a privileged class - those who are intelligent enough to grasp it.
And here is where I depart again from Analayo, whom I find a bit too democratic and egalitarian for trying to paint the dhamma as an openly accessible picture when it is anything but, it is accessible only to the wise, and how few they are.

The dhamma is not without an element of superiority.
User avatar
Ceisiwr
Posts: 22528
Joined: Sun Jan 11, 2009 2:36 am

Re: "Secular Buddhists" answer to ven. Anālayo's ‘Superiority Conceit in Buddhist Traditions’

Post by Ceisiwr »

nmjojola wrote: Sat Apr 03, 2021 12:51 pm I don't usually see eye to eye with Analayo but I do find myself in agreement with the general idea that there isn't anything secular about the dhamma, and to try to "secularize" it is to miss the point entirely (which is lokuttara).

However, the dhamma is, in a sense, elitist, in that the Buddhas teaching is for a privileged class - those who are intelligent enough to grasp it.
And here is where I depart again from Analayo, whom I find a bit too democratic and egalitarian for trying to paint the dhamma as an openly accessible picture when it is anything but, it is accessible only to the wise, and how few they are.

The dhamma is not without an element of superiority.
Indeed, it can be hard to grasp for most people.
“A senior mendicant with five qualities is dear and beloved to their spiritual companions, respected and admired. What five? They have attained the analytical knowledge [paṭisambhidā] of meaning, the analytical knowledge of the Dhamma, the analytical knowledge of language, the analytical knowledge of discernment, and he is skilful and diligent in attending to the diverse chores that are to be done for his fellow monks..."
AN 5.86
“Knowing that this body is just like foam,
understanding it has the nature of a mirage,
cutting off Māra’s flower-tipped arrows,
one should go beyond the King of Death’s sight.”
User avatar
bodom
Posts: 7219
Joined: Fri Jan 09, 2009 6:18 pm
Location: San Antonio, Texas

Re: "Secular Buddhists" answer to ven. Anālayo's ‘Superiority Conceit in Buddhist Traditions’

Post by bodom »

Kim OHara wrote: There's a sutra about that, if I remember correctly - something along the line of "anyone who claims that his dhamma alone is true and correct does not truly understand the dhamma."
Found here:
“But to what extent, Master Gotama, is there the safeguarding of the truth? To what extent does one safeguard the truth? We ask Master Gotama about the safeguarding of the truth.”

“If a person has conviction, his statement, ‘This is my conviction,’ safeguards the truth. But he doesn’t yet come to the definite conclusion that ‘Only this is true; anything else is worthless.’ To this extent, Bhāradvāja, there is the safeguarding of the truth. To this extent one safeguards the truth. I describe this as the safeguarding of the truth. Yet it is not yet an awakening to the truth.
https://www.dhammatalks.org/suttas/MN/MN95.html

: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
retrofuturist
Posts: 27858
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 9:52 pm
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Contact:

Re: "Secular Buddhists" answer to ven. Anālayo's ‘Superiority Conceit in Buddhist Traditions’

Post by retrofuturist »

Greetings Kim,
Kim OHara wrote: Fri Apr 02, 2021 10:04 am In fact, I'm going to suggest that every single Buddhist in the last two thousand years has had an incorrect view of the Dhamma.
retrofuturist wrote: Fri Apr 02, 2021 10:28 am So no arya in the past two millennia according to Kim O'Hara.
Kim OHara wrote: Fri Apr 02, 2021 10:04 am I didn't say that and I wouldn't say that.
Except you did. That's the logical consequence of your statement that "every single Buddhist in the last two thousand years has had an incorrect view of the Dhamma."... i.e. that none have even so much as achieved stream-entry. As you should know, entering the stream with noble Right View sets one upon the inevitable path of Right Knowledge.
MN117 wrote:"Of those, right view is the forerunner. And how is right view the forerunner? In one of right view, right resolve comes into being. In one of right resolve, right speech comes into being. In one of right speech, right action... In one of right action, right livelihood... In one of right livelihood, right effort... In one of right effort, right mindfulness... In one of right mindfulness, right concentration... In one of right concentration, right knowledge... In one of right knowledge, right release comes into being. Thus the learner is endowed with eight factors, and the arahant with ten.
Plus there is the sutta Bodom kindly shared that you hoped would justify your perspective... (emphasis mine)
MN95 wrote:With the arising of conviction, he visits him & grows close to him. Growing close to him, he lends ear. Lending ear, he hears the Dhamma. Hearing the Dhamma, he remembers it. Remembering it, he penetrates the meaning of those dhammas. Penetrating the meaning, he comes to an agreement through pondering those dhammas. There being an agreement through pondering those dhammas, desire arises. With the arising of desire, he becomes willing. Willing, he contemplates [lit: weighs, compares]. Contemplating, he makes an exertion. Exerting himself, he both realizes the highest truth with his body and sees by penetrating it with discernment.

To this extent, Bhāradvāja, there is an awakening to the truth. To this extent one awakens to the truth. I describe this as an awakening to the truth.
... which has nothing to do with your "anyone who claims that his dhamma...", since no one who follows the above instruction would be stupid or conceited enough to think it was his own personal Dhamma. He knows he has heard it by ear (or in the case of Sutta reading, by eye) thanks to another, and he would be grateful. He would know it either as the Dhamma or the Buddhadhamma, and he would be blessed to know it.

So pick one - either they have, or they haven't (or you don't know, that's fine too). Just don't complain about being misrepresented and act all hard done by, when you yourself said it, and it's there in black and white for anyone with eyes to see. And if you don't understand the Sutta implications of your statements because you elect to follow a hodge-podge of teachings, many not taught by the actual Buddha, then that's on you - nobody else.

Metta,
Paul. :)
"Whatever is true, whatever is noble, whatever is right, whatever is pure, whatever is lovely, whatever is admirable—if anything is excellent or praiseworthy—think about such things."
User avatar
mikenz66
Posts: 19947
Joined: Sat Jan 10, 2009 7:37 am
Location: Aotearoa, New Zealand

Re: "Secular Buddhists" answer to ven. Anālayo's ‘Superiority Conceit in Buddhist Traditions’

Post by mikenz66 »

retrofuturist wrote: Sat Apr 03, 2021 3:24 pm Greetings Kim,
Kim OHara wrote: Fri Apr 02, 2021 10:04 am In fact, I'm going to suggest that every single Buddhist in the last two thousand years has had an incorrect view of the Dhamma.
retrofuturist wrote: Fri Apr 02, 2021 10:28 am So no arya in the past two millennia according to Kim O'Hara.
Kim OHara wrote: Fri Apr 02, 2021 10:04 am I didn't say that and I wouldn't say that.
Except you did. That's the logical consequence of your statement that "every single Buddhist in the last two thousand years has had an incorrect view of the Dhamma."... i.e. that none have even so much as achieved stream-entry. As you should know, entering the stream with noble Right View sets one upon the inevitable path of Right Knowledge.
I think you may be misreading the statement. I took Kim to be saying that they all had wrong view before they were awakened, which is quite logical. And even If one is a stream enterer one doesn't have the whole truth.

:heart:
Mike
User avatar
retrofuturist
Posts: 27858
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 9:52 pm
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Contact:

Re: "Secular Buddhists" answer to ven. Anālayo's ‘Superiority Conceit in Buddhist Traditions’

Post by retrofuturist »

Greetings Mike,

I went back and read Kim's full post, but found no sense whatsoever of this "before" that you refer to, and as you know, the stream-entrant, by virtue of being in the stream, does lead onward to nibbana, so it's reasonable to assume this would not necessarily take two millennia, given that in the suttas many practitioners made that transition in the same lifetime. Further, as you know, the stream-winner is said to behold "the Dhamma eye", as they can see in accordance with the Dhamma. This is explained not in an impoverished way per Kim's faithlessness, but positively as per the Suttas (bolding for emphasis)...
Ud 5.3 wrote:Then when the Blessed One knew that Suppabuddha the leper's mind was ready, malleable, free from hindrances, elevated, & clear, he then gave the Dhamma-talk peculiar to Awakened Ones, i.e., stress, origination, cessation, & path. And just as a clean cloth, free of stains, would properly absorb a dye, in the same way, as Suppabuddha the leper was sitting in that very seat, the dustless, stainless Dhamma eye arose within him, "Whatever is subject to origination is all subject to cessation."

Having seen the Dhamma, reached the Dhamma, known the Dhamma, gained a foothold in the Dhamma, having crossed over & beyond doubt, having had no more perplexity, having gained fearlessness & independence from others with regard to the Teacher's message
, he got up from his seat and went to the Blessed One. On arrival, having bowed down to the Blessed One, he sat to one side. As he was sitting there he said to the Blessed One, "Magnificent, lord! Magnificent! Just as if he were to place upright what was overturned, to reveal what was hidden, to show the way to one who was lost, or to carry a lamp into the dark so that those with eyes could see forms, in the same way has the Blessed One — through many lines of reasoning — made the Dhamma clear. I go to the Blessed One for refuge, to the Dhamma, and to the Community of monks. May the Blessed One remember me as a lay follower who has gone to him for refuge, from this day forward, for life."
MN 9 wrote:"When, friends, a noble disciple understands the unwholesome, the root of the unwholesome, the wholesome, and the root of the wholesome, in that way he is one of right view, whose view is straight, who has perfect confidence in the Dhamma, and has arrived at this true Dhamma.
...
Saying, "Good, friend," the bhikkhus delighted and rejoiced in the Venerable Sariputta's words. Then they asked him a further question: "But, friend, might there be another way in which a noble disciple is one of right view... and has arrived at this true Dhamma?" — "There might be, friends.

"When, friends, a noble disciple understands suffering, the origin of suffering, the cessation of suffering, and the way leading to the cessation of suffering, in that way he is one of right view... and has arrived at this true Dhamma.

(and so on through various factors including those associated with paticcasamuppada...)
That said, what you said above does accord with the Suttas, so if Kim accepts your statement then that would at least be a coherent position. We shall see if he does.

:popcorn:

While we wait, it's worth remembering that conceit (mana) in the Dhamma comes about through identification and I-making, not by having knowledge and discernment over what is Right View and what is Wrong View.
SN 22.49 wrote:If one regards himself superior or equal or inferior by reason of the body that is impermanent, painful and subject to change, what else is it than not seeing reality? Or if one regards himself superior or equal or inferior by reason of feelings, perceptions, volitions or consciousness, what else is it than not seeing reality? If one does not regard himself superior or equal or inferior by reason of the body, the feelings, perceptions, volitions or consciousness what else is it than seeing reality?
To actually have Right View is not a conceit. In fact, Right View runs in the opposite direction of conceit, since Right View leads to the end of all I-making and conceit.
AN 3.33 wrote:Therefore, Sāriputta, you should train yourselves thus: (1) ‘There will be no I-making, mine-making, and underlying tendency to conceit in regard to this conscious body; (2) there will be no I-making, mine-making, and underlying tendency to conceit in regard to all external objects; and (3) we will enter and dwell in that liberation of mind, liberation by wisdom, through which there is no more I-making, mine-making, and underlying tendency to conceit for one who enters and dwells in it.’ It is in this way, Sāriputta, that you should train yourselves.
And as much as it is a post-modernist tendency is to pretend that things are or ought be equal for the sake of political correctness and protecting people's feelings, it is simply a reality in this Dhamma that those who do not have Right View suffer a bad fate, and that those who exacerbate their wrongness by reviling those who do have Right View, simply make things worse for themselves...
MN 130 wrote:Or how these beings — who were endowed with bad conduct of body, speech & mind, who reviled noble ones, held wrong views and undertook actions under the influence of wrong views — with the break-up of the body, after death, have re-appeared in the realm of the hungry ghosts. Or how these beings — who were endowed with bad conduct of body, speech & mind, who reviled noble ones, held wrong views and undertook actions under the influence of wrong views — with the break-up of the body, after death, have re-appeared in the animal womb. Or how these beings — who were endowed with bad conduct of body, speech & mind, who reviled noble ones, held wrong views and undertook actions under the influence of wrong views — with the break-up of the body, after death, have re-appeared in a plane of deprivation, a bad destination, a lower realm, hell.'
:buddha1:

Metta,
Paul. :)
"Whatever is true, whatever is noble, whatever is right, whatever is pure, whatever is lovely, whatever is admirable—if anything is excellent or praiseworthy—think about such things."
User avatar
mikenz66
Posts: 19947
Joined: Sat Jan 10, 2009 7:37 am
Location: Aotearoa, New Zealand

Re: "Secular Buddhists" answer to ven. Anālayo's ‘Superiority Conceit in Buddhist Traditions’

Post by mikenz66 »

retrofuturist wrote: Sat Apr 03, 2021 11:01 pm And as much as it is a post-modernist tendency is to pretend that things are or ought be equal for the sake of political correctness and protecting people's feelings, it is simply a reality in this Dhamma that those who do not have Right View suffer a bad fate, and that those who exacerbate their wrongness by reviling those who do have Right View, simply make things worse for themselves...
I must have missed this careless reviling of ariyas... When did that happen?

I also read Kims post, and I think my interpretation that he's talking about those who are not yet awakened is perfectly logical. He does say "has had"...

:heart:
Mike
User avatar
retrofuturist
Posts: 27858
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 9:52 pm
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Contact:

Re: "Secular Buddhists" answer to ven. Anālayo's ‘Superiority Conceit in Buddhist Traditions’

Post by retrofuturist »

Greetings,
mikenz66 wrote: Sun Apr 04, 2021 4:31 am I must have missed this careless reviling of ariyas... When did that happen?
Well, I had gone beyond Kim's words and was speaking generally about conceit (mana) and its meaning of regarding others as being better, worse, or equal (the latter of which gets little attention when we use only the English word "conceit" instead of the Pali term "mana"). But, yes, if there have been any ariyā in the past 2000 years, and Kim really is saying that "every single Buddhist in the last two thousand years has had an incorrect view of the Dhamma", then maybe...

👻😈☠️🧟‍♂️

As I said, we'll see what he says and whether he accepts your generous re-engineering of his words, and takes them as his own.

:popcorn:

Metta,
Paul. :)
"Whatever is true, whatever is noble, whatever is right, whatever is pure, whatever is lovely, whatever is admirable—if anything is excellent or praiseworthy—think about such things."
chownah
Posts: 9336
Joined: Wed Aug 12, 2009 2:19 pm

Re: "Secular Buddhists" answer to ven. Anālayo's ‘Superiority Conceit in Buddhist Traditions’

Post by chownah »

The buddha admitted having had an incorrect view of the dhamma before enlightenment......isn't this obvious in that he went around trying to learn about the dhamma from those teachers?.....if he had nothing but correct views on the dhamma there would have been no reason to go find a teacher!!!
chownah
User avatar
retrofuturist
Posts: 27858
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 9:52 pm
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Contact:

Re: "Secular Buddhists" answer to ven. Anālayo's ‘Superiority Conceit in Buddhist Traditions’

Post by retrofuturist »

Greetings Chownah,

That was when he was a puthujjana and so were all the other teachers around him.

No amount of exclamation marks make that relevant to today when the Buddha's dispensation is still in effect.

We are blessed that the path has been laid out, and all that we need to do is know it and establish ourselves in Right View. Conversely, I find it strange that people instead feel so threatened by the fact that the Buddha's teachings await us, that they would rather pull others down to their level than lift themselves up.

Metta,
Paul. :)
"Whatever is true, whatever is noble, whatever is right, whatever is pure, whatever is lovely, whatever is admirable—if anything is excellent or praiseworthy—think about such things."
User avatar
Pondera
Posts: 3075
Joined: Thu Aug 11, 2011 10:02 pm

Re: "Secular Buddhists" answer to ven. Anālayo's ‘Superiority Conceit in Buddhist Traditions’

Post by Pondera »

Ahem.

I’m Arya. The Arya reaches freedom and Unbinding - declares the profound lion’s roar “On this very night! Forsooth! I will utterly destroy the spokes that bind me to the wheel of becoming!!!”

Then he knows with discernment that he is free.

Thus, Buddhaghosa has said that the word “Arahant” means “Spoke - destroyer”.

I did that once. Haven’t done it again. Would like to. But it was quite a few years in the making.

Sorry to derail the topic. Seemed like it was going off the rails anyway. I’ll let you puttajanas get back to bickering.

If anyone wants the profound utterances of an Arya, I’ll be in the shower quietly sobbing away the days troubles. Just knock on the door three times and clear your throat once.

Is it just a coincidence that I a) am schizophrenic b) constantly hear and struggle with a real personification of Mara (or a being from his hoard) AND c) have witnessed Unbinding?

I would like to add that many mentally ill people in the Buddha’s days had to resort to begging in order to survive.

Without a doubt, most (if not all) of the Buddha’s contemporaries suffered from mental illness.

Note the lack of personal hygiene with some of his contemporaries (the robe made of hair - living in a pig pen). Note the religious dedication to extreme postures and non-action (a symptom of “catatonic schizophrenia”). Note also the disorganized speech and thinking characteristic of schizophrenics. For example, “there are 400 minor dreams. 650 major dreams. 3,000 places where dust collects” - and other nonsense like that. This can all be seen in DN 2.

🤔 it would seem to me plausible that the Buddha was troubled by voices and found the confines and expectations of the royal duties to be too much - thus he married a girl named Meghan and moved to Cali ... hold on. That’s the wrong prince.

What I mean is, Siddhartha likely left the palace to not only find a solution to suffering and silence the troubles of Mara’s evil plans - but also as a recognition that (in his mental state) he was “unfit” to “take office”.

Many schizophrenics have a positive prognosis. Ahem. Ahem. 🧐 I know of at least one who’s reached the summit of experience.

Anyhow. Carry on. Never mind the little schizoaffective over here.
Last edited by Pondera on Sun Apr 04, 2021 7:33 am, edited 1 time in total.
Like the three marks of conditioned existence, this world in itself is filthy, hostile, and crowded
SteRo
Posts: 5950
Joined: Fri Oct 11, 2019 10:27 am
Location: Εὐρώπη Eurṓpē

Re: "Secular Buddhists" answer to ven. Anālayo's ‘Superiority Conceit in Buddhist Traditions’

Post by SteRo »

:lol:
Cleared. αδόξαστος.
User avatar
Pondera
Posts: 3075
Joined: Thu Aug 11, 2011 10:02 pm

Re: "Secular Buddhists" answer to ven. Anālayo's ‘Superiority Conceit in Buddhist Traditions’

Post by Pondera »

SteRo wrote: Sun Apr 04, 2021 7:15 am:lol:
I guess a laugh is some kind of recognition.

I’ll tell you a little secret, SteRo. Just between you and me. This doesn’t leave the forum.

So in my province, there was once a great psychiatric hospital with numerous four story buildings on 250 acres of land. It was established in 1918 and (over time) housed thousands of mentally ill people.

After spending a year in a small hospital in a psychiatric unit, the doctors couldn’t get me the right treatment - so they sent me to the “BIG HOSPITAL”.

So, in 2008, I ended up on this very old, very large, psychiatric facility.

And, in order to get me on the right meds, they decided to take me off everything I was already on. Needless to say, my condition became much worse. I stopped eating. I ate one meal every three days at the behest of my mother who was beside her self with grief. I dropped to 130 lbs.

One day, they said, “Ben (Ben’s not my real name) - they said, “Ben, why don’t you choose your meds”. I said, “I have the exact thing.” Then I listed a mild antipsychotic and a benzodiazepine.

In three weeks I was out of the hospital. In 2010 they had completely shut down every ward on the site except three small units. It was a government mandate to save money. Many of the ill wound up on the street using narcotics.

Fortunately for me, I had met my wife to be and I was working part time in a pizza parlour.

In 2013, I needed another job - so I applied for a security license. Now, one of the questions on that application form was “have you ever been treated for a mental illness?” So naturally, I lied and obtained by Security License.

Do you want to know where I ended up in 2013? I landed a job at the very same 250 acre plot of land with its numerous buildings and wards.

I was nervous at first. There were still three open wards on the site and I was afraid one of the patients would recognize. Hell! One of the nurses would recognize me! That would be it.

Of course, all the staff from 2008 had migrated to other hospitals. However, I saw more than a couple patients who I had once lived with in close quarters.

They would sometimes throw me a queer glance - as if to say, “I feel like I know you”. But the uniform apparently confused them. And I realized that many of these mentally ill people have gone beyond the limits of sanity.

In other words, they had gone so psychotic that something in their mind had snapped. I soon realized that even the one’s who recognized my face were likely going mad inside to try and figure out who this security guard was and why they felt like they’d seen me somewhere. In all honesty, it probably didn’t trouble them more than it troubled me.

The job lasted three years. I moved on to high rise window cleaning. But my wife and I always joke about those poor patients scratching their heads trying to figure out where in God’s name they’d seen that Security guard.

Some of us schizophrenics will endure the utmost kind of bizarre hallucination and paranoid delusion - and STILL come out with their sanity in tact.

Although I often struggle with a demon (and I do not mean that metaphorically) I have fooled everyone and chiselled out a fairly decent existence for my self.

The Unbinding is TRUE!!! But did I go absolutely bonkers after that single night of mind expanding bliss? Oh yea. I surely did. That was when my schizophrenia really started.

Anyhow. I hope you enjoyed that little story. Let’s not let it circulate too much now. :spy:

God bless you on the Easter weekend, good aggregate of form, feeling, perception, impulses, and consciousness (conventionally known as “SteRo”).

:anjali:
Like the three marks of conditioned existence, this world in itself is filthy, hostile, and crowded
Post Reply