Revealing secrets

[Bundokji]

Friends,

Lay life is full of secrets, which are often based on the perceived privacy/inaudibility of thoughts to external parties. The act of revealing is considered an act of will or right of which consent deemed necessary for ethical and legal conduct. Apart from the straightforward cases where secrets are shared through verbal communications, practitioners with psychic powers are said to have broken such barriers where "secrets" are supposedly hidden, such as in the case of mind-reading abilities, or clairvoyance where naked bodies can be possibly seen.

Is there any part of the teachings that regulates this?

Many thanks

[santa100]

Is there any part of the teachings that regulates this?

Kind of... in the sense that those powers are not automatically present and available 24/7. Although all knowable things are potentially accessible to the Buddha, even He Himself never claimed to know and see everything simultaneously, and had to focus His mind to whatever He wanted to know ( ref: MN 71. ). And another factor is that once one starts to abuse his newly acquired powers, like using them for unwholesome purposes, s/he'd quickly lose them (like the case of Devadatta).

[Mahabrahma]

Abilities generally align with your moral level, or your moral level is connected to your abilities that can strengthen your moral resolve if it is lacking. A good example is proficiency in sword fighting, you have to be a moral person and do all you can not to injure or kill others, and fight with skill, as you teach your opponent your ways if he is wicked, so he eventually walks with you to the distant goal of Ahimsa. Once the goal is reached after many encounters and negotiations, the purpose of martial arts is revealed.

[dharmacorps]

The most relevant part of the canon is that the Buddha taught with an open hand, not a closed fist.

[Bundokji]

The most relevant part of the canon is that the Buddha taught with an open hand, not a closed fist.

It is clearly declared, with an open hand, that certain individuals have access to phenomena that are inaccessible to the general public or ordinary people. This presumed inaccessibility is the basis of an entire value system that such abilities theoretically threatens. Considering that not every individual who developed such abilities is necessarily abiding by the highest moral standards, i was wondering if the Sangha had rules to organize these issues?

For example, the Buddha likened monks who demonstrate their psychic abilities to laity as a prostitute who shows her vagina to the public. Do not you think that such analogy is revealing? It seems that lay "privacy" means very little when the main concern is to prevent laity from getting infatuated with psychic abilities, but what guarantees do we have that individuals with such psychic abilities are not infatuated with lay privacy?

[dharmacorps]

For example, the Buddha likened monks who demonstrate their psychic abilities to laity as a prostitute who shows her vagina to the public. Do not you think that such analogy is revealing?

Uh, yeah... It definitely is. It is certainly a clear message of how vulgar and unskillful a persistent obsession with psychic powers and the overall subject is.
Not lost on me.

[Bundokji]

Uh, yeah... It definitely is. It is certainly a clear message of how vulgar and unskillful a persistent obsession with psychic powers and the overall subject is.
Not lost on me.

There are detailed descriptions on how monks behave and what are the consequences. Details can be a sign of obsessions, but they are integral to regulating a community. For example:

At one time a monk who was an alms-collector saw a little girl lying on a bench. Being lustful, he inserted his thumb into her vagina. She died. He became anxious … “There’s no offense entailing expulsion, but there’s an offense entailing suspension.”

Would you consider such detail as "inserted his thumb into her vagina" obscenity or obsession with sex? or simply presenting a real case?

Now, imagine this same monk who goes to the village for alms saw an attractive female lay follower, and he used his psychic powers to see her naked body while she is taking a shower. Would not that warrant a regulatory framework by the monastic community?

[dharmacorps]

Now, imagine this same monk who goes to the village for alms saw an attractive female lay follower, and he used his psychic powers to see her naked body while she is taking a shower. Would not that warrant a regulatory framework by the monastic community?

You have completely lost me. What on earth are you talking about?

I think you have given a great example though, of how obsessing over psychic powers can disturb the mind, even if you don't have them.

[Bundokji]

You have completely lost me. What on earth are you talking about?

I think you have given a great example though, of how obsessing over psychic powers can disturb the mind, even if you don't have them.

I do not see anything disturbing the mind!

I am providing examples and rationale relevant to the ethical implications of people (especially monastics) misusing psychic powers. Such concerns is not so different from how intelligence agencies can misuse their powers against the people they are supposed to protect. It is up to governments to create internal mechanisms that minimizes such potential misuse/abuse of power.

Psychic powers are more common among monastics by virtue of their dedication to meditation. When the Buddha (the governor/the highest authority) was alive, he introduced rules relevant to the monastic community and their possible interactions with laity. I am simply asking if there are rules or mechanisms to prevent misuse of psychic powers.

What is so disturbing about such a straightforward and legitimate question? If you do not know of such mechanism, then simply say so. If you know, then please share.

[Bundokji]

Relevant to the topic in hand is Ud 5.5. The lord Buddha declared:

"Ānanda, the gathering isn't pure."

It took Ven. Mahā Moggallāna, foremost in psychic abilities, to spot the corrupt individual within the community:

"Get up, friend. You have been seen by the Blessed One. You have no affiliation with the community of monks."

Then the lord Buddha declared:

"Isn't it amazing, Moggallāna. Isn't it astounding, how that worthless man waited until he was grabbed by the arm." Then the Blessed One addressed the monks: "From now on I will no longer perform the observance or recite the Pāṭimokkha. From now on, you alone, monks, will perform the observance and recite the Pāṭimokkha. It is impossible, it cannot happen, that a Tathāgata would perform the observance or recite the Pāṭimokkha with an impure gathering.

How best to understand the above. Does the above constitute a guarantee that the monastic community will always be pure?

Happy Uposatha everyone

[santa100]

Psychic powers are more common among monastics by virtue of their dedication to meditation. When the Buddha (the governor/the highest authority) was alive, he introduced rules relevant to the monastic community and their possible interactions with laity. I am simply asking if there are rules or mechanisms to prevent misuse of psychic powers.

As mentioned in the previous post of the same thread, it's pretty much kinda self-regulated in the sense that one who abuses their supernatural powers will quickly/naturally lose them and even retrogress down to woeful states ( Devadatta for ex. ). So a naughty monk who uses his power for some brief fleeting moment of peeping Tom's gratification on his love interest would very quickly learn an expensive lesson.

[Bundokji]

As mentioned in the previous post of the same thread, it's pretty much kinda self-regulated in the sense that one who abuses their supernatural powers will quickly/naturally lose them and even retrogress down to woeful states ( Devadatta for ex. ). So a naughty monk who uses his power for some brief fleeting moment of peeping Tom's gratification on his love interest would very quickly learn an expensive lesson.

I think Devadatta is an extreme case. His evil attempt to injure the Buddha resulted in quick ripening of his kamma. This could be compared/contrasted with Mara Dusi's attempt on Buddha Kassapa, which equally resulted in quick ripening. Apart from such extreme cases, Maras live for long time. One could argue that Maras are devas, but the thing with psychic powers is that it raises questions about the appearance of corporeality and sentience. From the human perspective, technology break barriers that could still be explained through the laws of physics. Those who develop powers such as walking on water or through walls or multiply can be said to be humans only as a formality.

It is interesting that in Ud 5.5, the eight amazing & astounding qualities of this Dhamma & Vinaya, which are likened to great ocean, are equally enjoyed by the asuras.

[santa100]

I think Devadatta is an extreme case. His evil attempt to injure the Buddha resulted in quick ripening of his kamma. This could be compared/contrasted with Mara Dusi's attempt on Buddha Kassapa, which equally resulted in quick ripening. Apart from such extreme cases, Maras live for long time. One could argue that Maras are devas, but the thing with psychic powers is that it raises questions about the appearance of corporeality and sentience. From the human perspective, technology break barriers that could still be explained through the laws of physics. Those who develop powers such as walking on water or through walls or multiply can be said to be humans only as a formality.

"... can be said to be humans only as a formality" - not necessarily. To the 2-dimensional flat-landers in Prof. Carl Sagan's story, we humans would seem like gods to them, for we can really literally perform those supernatural powers of appearing/disappearing right in front of their eyes! So technically speaking, and by inference, one who's gained access to a 5th dimension outside of our 4 conventional space-time dimension would be able to perform those supernormal powers with ease. The only thing is, according to the Teaching, it'd require tons of effort and time to fulfill high levels of Sila and Samadhi before one's able to gain access to such capabilities. But even those powers are also subjected to Anicca and Dukkha, for the moment one starts to slack off on his moral virtues and start getting naughty, s/he'd easily lose them.

[Bundokji]

The only thing is, according to the Teaching, it'd require tons of effort and time to fulfill high levels of Sila and Samadhi before one's able to gain access to such capabilities. But even those powers are also subjected to Anicca and Dukkha, for the moment one starts to slack off on his moral virtues and start getting naughty, s/he'd easily lose them.

I heard that Devadatta attained his psychic powers after his first retreat. Acknowledging it is an extreme case, i also remember Ven. Sujato talking about people attaining the Jhanas without much training - it happens naturally to them.

Maybe you are right if you are describing the majority. I am not sure if Anicca and Dukkha discriminate between good and evil though.

[santa100]

I heard that Devadatta attained his psychic powers after his first retreat. Acknowledging it is an extreme case, i also remember Ven. Sujato talking about people attaining the Jhanas without much training - it happens naturally to them.

Maybe you are right if you are describing the majority. I am not sure if Anicca and Dukkha discriminate between good and evil though.

I'd be very cautious when some monk proclaiming other peoples' attainment due to that not-so-subtle hint about their own attainment as mentioned in a different thread.