if you witness a crime

Textual analysis and comparative discussion on early Buddhist sects and scriptures.
auto
Posts: 4582
Joined: Thu Dec 21, 2017 12:02 pm

Re: if you witness a crime

Post by auto »

frank k wrote: Sat Nov 13, 2021 11:08 am I did address the issue. The suttas make it clear, about 50 out of 152 MN suttas for example, make it exceedingly clear that 4 jhanas is necessary for liberation. It doesn't say access concentration is sufficient for liberation, and there is no access concentration in the EBT. That the access concentration of Vism. is roughly equivalent to EBT sutta jhana, doesn't help matters. People are going to remember that the suttas make it crystal clear that JHANA is necessary, so if they're under the wrong view that VRJ (vism. redefinition of jhana) is the same as sutta JHANA, then that's what they're going to shoot for.

And not to mention that if they think VRJ is real jhana, then the suttas have been destroyed for them (on the jhana instructions), because now they can't read sutta passages on jhana and make any sense out of them, since their using a corrupted dictionary and have some wrong understandings that they're trying to read into the suttas. That's a horrendous crime, done intentionally.
I think you are mistaking interpretation of jhana to be the jhana. You have to know sutta jhana before you can recognize that they speak of Sutta jhana. Its similar to what idioms are.
Now if you argue that the access can't substitute jhana then you are claiming there is no sense object during jhana. Because access concentration is jhana-limited to the sensual realm.

access is proximity cause for entering jhana,
visuddhimagga 141 wrote:Absorption concentration is the unification that
follows immediately upon the preliminary-work (IV.74) because of the words, “The
first-jhána preliminary-work is a condition, as proximity condition, for the first
jhána” (Paþþh II 350 (Se). So it is of two kinds as access and absorption.
looks like access is part of the purification of the way
pati 13 wrote:In these four instances mind arrived at unity (ekatta):
(11) enters into purification of the way,
(12) is intensified in equanimity,
(13) is satisfied by knowledge.
What is the beginning, the middle, and the end, of the first jhana?
Of the first jhana purification of the way is the beginning, intensification of
equanimity is the middle, and encouragement is the end.
access purifies mind from obstructions
pati wrote:The beginning has three characteristics:
(i) mind is purified of obstructions to that [jhana];
(ii) because it is purified, mind makes way for the central sign of calm abiding;
(iii) because it has made way, mind enters into that state.
characteristic is also the function for attaining said characteristic,
visuddhimagga 140 wrote:Concentration has non-distraction as its characteristic.3 Its function is to eliminate
distraction. It is manifested as non-wavering. Because of the words, “Being blissful,
his mind becomes concentrated” (D I 73), its proximate cause is bliss.
vitakka what arises during access denotes jhana beginning. Vitakka absorbs states what are associated with the appana citta.
visuddhimagga and point 4 is footnote on it wrote:(1) First of all it is of one kind with the characteristic of non-distraction. (2)
Then it is of two kinds as access and absorption;4
4. “Applied thought that occurs as though absorbing (appento) associated states in
the object is absorption (appaná). Accordingly it is described as ‘absorption, absorbing
(appaná vyappaná)’ (M III 73). Now since that is the most important, the usage of the
Commentaries is to call all exalted and unsurpassed jhána states ‘absorption’ [as well
as the applied thought itself], and likewise to apply the term of common usage ‘access’
to the limited [i.e. sense-sphere] jhána that heralds the arising of the former, just as the
term ‘village access,’ etc. is applied to the neighbourhood of a village” (Vism-mhþ 91).
Jhana is supramundane, it is the fruit of the noble ones establishing cessation. At the moment of cessation the absorption is on the path fruit.
waryoffolly
Posts: 346
Joined: Fri Oct 04, 2013 8:30 pm

Re: if you witness a crime

Post by waryoffolly »

frank k wrote: Sat Nov 13, 2021 11:30 am Maybe one thing you guys aren't understanding is that many people practicing (what they believe is) jhana, whether ordained or yogi, are hard core practitioners who have a strong conviction in karma and rebirth, and they aren't casual meditators looking to improve their mental focus so they can be more productive at work or in school.
Personally, the idea of using dhamma as a tool to “get ahead” deeply sickens me. My work is for the purpose of my practice, not the other way around.

Being a “hardcore practitioner” is a type of painful identity view, going that route is a path of painful practice and creates “renunciate stress”. Why? Because it’s hell to have to constantly defend such an idea, like walking on a tightrope. I’d encourage anyone with that view to drop it and focus on cultivation instead of “being hardcore”. (And I have no clue if you’re doing this or not obviously, but it sounds like the people you’ve mentioned before who are too tense could be suffering from “being hardcore” and “needing to achieve progress”.)
They're practicing to attain a strong enough samadhi to make an end of rebirth and suffering.

Many westerners don't believe in rebirth, so then of course the stakes for everything is much lower, and important things like preservation of genuine Dhamma for the world don't seem like a crime or a big deal.
Again, I have no problem with directly criticizing inefficiencies or inaccuracies with xyz approach (and like you say, it’s important to do so), but what you’re doing goes far beyond that. You are ridiculing others in many of your blog posts and doing so is contributing to divides at least in this particular online community. Those splits do not help anyone. They make it MORE difficult to help each other and communicate. The stakes are too high for too many people to just label a very large percentage of other practitioners as “the other side” and push them further away by insulting monastics (“criminal”) they respect and admire. Whether or not your intention is to do so, that is how you come across, and that is one of the results of your actions. And yeah, there are also positive results of your stuff as well, but why why not keep the criticisms and toss out the insults and divisive speech?

If I was talking to someone else, I might be less direct, but you seem like the kind of person who appreciates well um… “frankness” 😂.

Anyways, it’s probably time to wrap up this specific conversation between us. I think we’re just repeating ourselves at this point.
User avatar
mikenz66
Posts: 19941
Joined: Sat Jan 10, 2009 7:37 am
Location: Aotearoa, New Zealand

Re: if you witness a crime

Post by mikenz66 »

frank k wrote: Sat Nov 13, 2021 11:08 am And not to mention that if they think VRJ is real jhana, then the suttas have been destroyed for them ...
Thank you for your concern. Since noone on this thread seems to have changed their views, even after years of hearing the arguments, it's probably best for me to call it a day...

Be well!

:heart:
Mike
User avatar
mikenz66
Posts: 19941
Joined: Sat Jan 10, 2009 7:37 am
Location: Aotearoa, New Zealand

Re: if you witness a crime

Post by mikenz66 »

waryoffolly wrote: Sat Nov 13, 2021 6:56 pmThose splits do not help anyone. They make it MORE difficult to help each other and communicate. The stakes are too high for too many people to just label a very large percentage of other practitioners as “the other side” and push them further away by insulting monastics (“criminal”) they respect and admire.
Well said. This is a difficult and subtle path to navigate, and I appreciate the efforts of the many teachers and commentators who have given me some small insights into it.

:heart:
Mike
User avatar
frank k
Posts: 2247
Joined: Sat Jan 01, 2011 4:55 pm
Contact:

Re: if you witness a crime

Post by frank k »

waryoffolly wrote: Sat Nov 13, 2021 6:56 pm ...why not keep the criticisms and toss out the insults and divisive speech?...
Anyways, it’s probably time to wrap up this specific conversation between us. I think we’re just repeating ourselves at this point.
Yes, we are repeating ourselves, so my final remarks:

You're discounting the case where objective criticism is perceived as insulting because the nature of the offense is criminal.
If I deliberately undersell and soft pedal the criticism to avoid the perception of 'insult and divisive speech', then it hides the crime, and people continue to treat it as a minor forgivable offense, instead of the serious crime that it is.

What I'm calling out as crime, most people don't even realize is a crime, and a big part of that is the lack of direct unfiltered criticism of the offense without euphemisms and softening the severity of the crime.

For example, if I were to do the same thing as Sujato, rewrite the Arabic dictionary and rewrite the Christian Bible lexicon, I could make the Quoran and Bible describe a path to nirvana, and arahantship using jhana.

That would be a crime, and I would be a criminal, for such a blatant misrepresentation of those religions. If I were to do that, would anyone be surprised if there was a fatwa issued and I was dead within 2 years?

Is it insulting and divisive to say what I did was criminal?


As I already told you before, I welcome constructive criticism, with specific suggestions on how I can reword certain criticisms to be less divisive without losing the magnitude of the raw unpleasant truth. And what would really convince me, is for you to show me your success stories where your methods proved to be more effective. While I understand your point that perception of being insulted leads to divisiveness, I believe there is still a long term benefit of the public awareness being established that the offenses being committed are criminal, not trivial.
www.lucid24.org/sted : ☸Lucid24.org🐘 STED definitions
www.audtip.org/audtip: 🎙️🔊Audio Tales in Pāli: ☸Dharma and Vinaya in many languages
auto
Posts: 4582
Joined: Thu Dec 21, 2017 12:02 pm

Re: if you witness a crime

Post by auto »

frank k wrote: Fri Apr 09, 2021 5:20 pm I don't agree with that. I believe arahant monks do emit semen, and arahant nuns who are young still menstruate monthly.
The key is they (arahants) have perfected sati and sampajano, and have zero lust and no delusion.
But they still have to eat, shit, and bodies still carry on their biological functions.
If I had to guess, I'd say maybe arahant monks emit semen once or twice a year, whatever 'freshness' natural expiration date of viable semen needs to be replaced with fresh viable batch.
If someone were to rape an arahant nun who was fertile, would they not get pregnant?
If a doctor were to stick a needle in an arahant to extract some semen, would it not be viable (capable to producing children)?

That's the purpose of semen emission (done while asleep, but with no dream, no lust, just elimination of waste material)
Here you go against Sutta. Also trying to justify your position with everyday logic, nothing through other doctrines what would imply that for some reason sati allows emitting semen.
I think you were confused by thinking it also entails one doesn't have semen? why not think in terms of losing sati and then one can emit semen, but when one has sati then can't emit semen?
Perhaps you are not aware of that there is a mechanism in body what catapults semen out of the body? and that you need bodily expression in order to make it happen, but when there is sati then this is impossible?
https://suttacentral.net/an5.210/en/sujato?layout=sidebyside&reference=none&notes=asterisk&highlight=false&script=latin wrote:You sleep at ease and wake happily. You don’t have bad dreams. The deities protect you. And you don’t emit semen.
Sukhaṁ supati, sukhaṁ paṭibujjhati, na pāpakaṁ supinaṁ passati, devatā rakkhanti, asuci na muccati.
These are the five benefits of falling asleep mindful and aware.”
Ime kho, bhikkhave, pañca ānisaṁsā upaṭṭhitassatissa sampajānassa niddaṁ okkamayato”ti.
User avatar
frank k
Posts: 2247
Joined: Sat Jan 01, 2011 4:55 pm
Contact:

Re: if you witness a crime

Post by frank k »

Dear moderator, could you please remove auto's msg? He copied it over from a different thread (different topic) not locked, it appears he deliberately posted on this thread to derail the OP.

auto wrote: Sun Nov 14, 2021 3:32 pm
frank k wrote: Fri Apr 09, 2021 5:20 pm I don't agree with that. I believe arahant monks do emit semen, and arahant nuns who are young still menstruate monthly.
The key is they (arahants) have perfected sati and sampajano, and have zero lust and no delusion.
But they still have to eat, shit, and bodies still carry on their biological functions.
If I had to guess, I'd say maybe arahant monks emit semen once or twice a year, whatever 'freshness' natural expiration date of viable semen needs to be replaced with fresh viable batch.
If someone were to rape an arahant nun who was fertile, would they not get pregnant?
If a doctor were to stick a needle in an arahant to extract some semen, would it not be viable (capable to producing children)?

That's the purpose of semen emission (done while asleep, but with no dream, no lust, just elimination of waste material)
Here you go against Sutta. Also trying to justify your position with everyday logic, nothing through other doctrines what would imply that for some reason sati allows emitting semen.
I think you were confused by thinking it also entails one doesn't have semen? why not think in terms of losing sati and then one can emit semen, but when one has sati then can't emit semen?
Perhaps you are not aware of that there is a mechanism in body what catapults semen out of the body? and that you need bodily expression in order to make it happen, but when there is sati then this is impossible?
https://suttacentral.net/an5.210/en/sujato?layout=sidebyside&reference=none&notes=asterisk&highlight=false&script=latin wrote:You sleep at ease and wake happily. You don’t have bad dreams. The deities protect you. And you don’t emit semen.
Sukhaṁ supati, sukhaṁ paṭibujjhati, na pāpakaṁ supinaṁ passati, devatā rakkhanti, asuci na muccati.
These are the five benefits of falling asleep mindful and aware.”
Ime kho, bhikkhave, pañca ānisaṁsā upaṭṭhitassatissa sampajānassa niddaṁ okkamayato”ti.
www.lucid24.org/sted : ☸Lucid24.org🐘 STED definitions
www.audtip.org/audtip: 🎙️🔊Audio Tales in Pāli: ☸Dharma and Vinaya in many languages
User avatar
frank k
Posts: 2247
Joined: Sat Jan 01, 2011 4:55 pm
Contact:

Re: if you witness a crime

Post by frank k »

One more thing with my hypothetical example of deliberately misrepresenting a religion by corrupting the dictionary.
Also assume for that example I'm extraordinarily popular, a major influencer, and people will believe what I say and act out on that without question.
Note that in the legal sense, I'm not committing any crime by promoting my version of the bible, Jesus, and the Quoran, but karmically, and spiritually, I'm committing a grave crime, and in the real world I'd face the consequences pretty quickly, most likely getting assassinated by religious zealots.



frank k wrote: Sun Nov 14, 2021 12:08 pm
waryoffolly wrote: Sat Nov 13, 2021 6:56 pm ...why not keep the criticisms and toss out the insults and divisive speech?...
Anyways, it’s probably time to wrap up this specific conversation between us. I think we’re just repeating ourselves at this point.
Yes, we are repeating ourselves, so my final remarks:

You're discounting the case where objective criticism is perceived as insulting because the nature of the offense is criminal.
If I deliberately undersell and soft pedal the criticism to avoid the perception of 'insult and divisive speech', then it hides the crime, and people continue to treat it as a minor forgivable offense, instead of the serious crime that it is.

What I'm calling out as crime, most people don't even realize is a crime, and a big part of that is the lack of direct unfiltered criticism of the offense without euphemisms and softening the severity of the crime.

For example, if I were to do the same thing as Sujato, rewrite the Arabic dictionary and rewrite the Christian Bible lexicon, I could make the Quoran and Bible describe a path to nirvana, and arahantship using jhana.

That would be a crime, and I would be a criminal, for such a blatant misrepresentation of those religions. If I were to do that, would anyone be surprised if there was a fatwa issued and I was dead within 2 years?

Is it insulting and divisive to say what I did was criminal?


As I already told you before, I welcome constructive criticism, with specific suggestions on how I can reword certain criticisms to be less divisive without losing the magnitude of the raw unpleasant truth. And what would really convince me, is for you to show me your success stories where your methods proved to be more effective. While I understand your point that perception of being insulted leads to divisiveness, I believe there is still a long term benefit of the public awareness being established that the offenses being committed are criminal, not trivial.
www.lucid24.org/sted : ☸Lucid24.org🐘 STED definitions
www.audtip.org/audtip: 🎙️🔊Audio Tales in Pāli: ☸Dharma and Vinaya in many languages
User avatar
Ceisiwr
Posts: 22391
Joined: Sun Jan 11, 2009 2:36 am
Location: Wales

Re: if you witness a crime

Post by Ceisiwr »

frank k wrote: Mon Nov 15, 2021 6:05 pm
Note that in the legal sense, I'm not committing any crime by promoting my version of the bible, Jesus, and the Quoran, but karmically, and spiritually, I'm committing a grave crime, and in the real world I'd face the consequences pretty quickly, most likely getting assassinated by religious zealots.
Sorry Frank, are you suggesting that Ajahn Brahm etc should be assassinated for their views?
“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
frank k
Posts: 2247
Joined: Sat Jan 01, 2011 4:55 pm
Contact:

Re: if you witness a crime

Post by frank k »

Ceisiwr wrote: Mon Nov 15, 2021 6:42 pm
frank k wrote: Mon Nov 15, 2021 6:05 pm
Note that in the legal sense, I'm not committing any crime by promoting my version of the bible, Jesus, and the Quoran, but karmically, and spiritually, I'm committing a grave crime, and in the real world I'd face the consequences pretty quickly, most likely getting assassinated by religious zealots.
Sorry Frank, are you suggesting that Ajahn Brahm etc should be assassinated for their views?
What I said is that in the real world, governed by karmic laws, karmic 'crimes' don't care what a legal definition of a 'crime' is, and that real world karmic consequences are often much more severe than laws of a government.
What I do suggest is that you read things carefully and don't make wild extrapolations.
www.lucid24.org/sted : ☸Lucid24.org🐘 STED definitions
www.audtip.org/audtip: 🎙️🔊Audio Tales in Pāli: ☸Dharma and Vinaya in many languages
User avatar
frank k
Posts: 2247
Joined: Sat Jan 01, 2011 4:55 pm
Contact:

Re: if you witness a crime

Post by frank k »

Reposting my closing remarks since trolls keep spamming the thread trying to derail it:
waryoffolly wrote: Sat Nov 13, 2021 6:56 pm ...why not keep the criticisms and toss out the insults and divisive speech?...
Anyways, it’s probably time to wrap up this specific conversation between us. I think we’re just repeating ourselves at this point.
Yes, we are repeating ourselves, so my final remarks:

You're discounting the case where objective criticism is perceived as insulting because the nature of the offense is criminal.
If I deliberately undersell and soft pedal the criticism to avoid the perception of 'insult and divisive speech', then it hides the crime, and people continue to treat it as a minor forgivable offense, instead of the serious crime that it is.

What I'm calling out as crime, most people don't even realize is a crime, and a big part of that is the lack of direct unfiltered criticism of the offense without euphemisms and softening the severity of the crime.

For example, if I were to do the same thing as Sujato, rewrite the Arabic dictionary and rewrite the Christian Bible lexicon, I could make the Quoran and Bible describe a path to nirvana, and arahantship using jhana.

That would be a crime, and I would be a criminal, for such a blatant misrepresentation of those religions. If I were to do that, would anyone be surprised if there was a fatwa issued and I was dead within 2 years?

Is it insulting and divisive to say what I did was criminal?


As I already told you before, I welcome constructive criticism, with specific suggestions on how I can reword certain criticisms to be less divisive without losing the magnitude of the raw unpleasant truth. And what would really convince me, is for you to show me your success stories where your methods proved to be more effective. While I understand your point that perception of being insulted leads to divisiveness, I believe there is still a long term benefit of the public awareness being established that the offenses being committed are criminal, not trivial.
www.lucid24.org/sted : ☸Lucid24.org🐘 STED definitions
www.audtip.org/audtip: 🎙️🔊Audio Tales in Pāli: ☸Dharma and Vinaya in many languages
Post Reply