Author Topic: Non-Religious Vipassana Board Please :-)  (Read 10197 times)

Matthew

  • The Irreverent Buddhist
  • Staff
  • Meditation: It's a D.I.Y. project.
    • KISS: Keep it simple stupid.
    • Getting nowhere slowly and enjoying every moment.
Re: Non-Religious Vipassana Board Please :-)
« Reply #25 on: June 01, 2010, 11:26:08 AM »
It all comes to being Alone with One Self anyway, with or without this new board. New board New thoughts, New ideas, good old mind games ...

Exactly.
~oOo~     Tat Tvam Asi     ~oOo~    How will you make the world a better place today?     ~oOo~    Fabricate Nothing     ~oOo~

Matthew

  • The Irreverent Buddhist
  • Staff
  • Meditation: It's a D.I.Y. project.
    • KISS: Keep it simple stupid.
    • Getting nowhere slowly and enjoying every moment.
Re: Non-Religious Vipassana Board Please :-)
« Reply #26 on: June 01, 2010, 11:29:17 AM »
Reality does not depend on teaching of even the coolest guy

Yes it does. "Cool" is regularly used as a synonym for Nibanna in the Pali Cannon. The "coolest guy" was Shakyamuni Gautama Buddha. What was true in his time is true today and will ever be so.

Warmly,

Matthew
~oOo~     Tat Tvam Asi     ~oOo~    How will you make the world a better place today?     ~oOo~    Fabricate Nothing     ~oOo~

mik1e

  • Guest
Re: Non-Religious Vipassana Board Please :-)
« Reply #27 on: June 01, 2010, 06:58:32 PM »
kidnovice,

Thanks for relevant answer :).

I was talking about this thread only, and I agree with your words about the site as the whole.

I think that it is enough to design a smiler "No Suttas, please", and use it to mark specific questions or threads, it will be enough. But my main point was that there is no one here (in this thread) who does have questions -- only those who want to indulge in chatting. Chatting about practice instead of practicing is the first problem of modern "practitioners". Actually, those who do practice, rarely chat on forums.

"Suttas problem" is, actually, about terms and description only, not about the reality which is described. From that point of view, the statement "What was true in Buddha's time is true today and will ever be so" is obviously correct. But it absolutely does not mean that we have to describe these "true things" in the same language and in the same manner as early Buddhists or even  Buddha himself did.

Here it will be nice to make an analogy with chemistry and alchemistry. In ancient alchemic texts there are many descriptions of chemicals reactions. Modern people will hardly understand them, even if they are very simple. But the same reactions, written in modern chemical symbols, are well understandable and cause no troubles: 2H2 + O2 = H2O.

The same is with Buddhism. Buddha looked at some reality and spoke about it. However, his description (and, especially, texts of his followers) is very "alchemical", according to the culture and level of knowledge (set of terms) of their society. Does it mean that Buddha's description is the only correct one? Absolutely not. Today we can provide "chemical" description of the same reality, and it will be as correct, as Buddha's one, but without any Buddha's word. Description depends on the reality and culture, but reality does not depend on description.


Matthew

  • The Irreverent Buddhist
  • Staff
  • Meditation: It's a D.I.Y. project.
    • KISS: Keep it simple stupid.
    • Getting nowhere slowly and enjoying every moment.
Re: Non-Religious Vipassana Board Please :-)
« Reply #28 on: June 01, 2010, 07:49:23 PM »
...
I was talking about this thread only, and I agree with your words about the site as the whole.

Glad you agree on that point.

....But my main point was that there is no one here (in this thread) who does have questions -- ....

Actually Morning Dew asked a practical question - that was the start of the thread.

.... only those who want to indulge in chatting.


Answering questions is not chatting. What is your problem here? There is a vast amount of hidden anger in your reply.

Chatting about practice instead of practicing is the first problem of modern "practitioners". Actually, those who do practice, rarely chat on forums.

Agree with the first part entirely. The second part I can not agree with.

"Suttas problem" is, actually, about terms and description only, not about the reality which is described. From that point of view, the statement "What was true in Buddha's time is true today and will ever be so" is obviously correct. But it absolutely does not mean that we have to describe these "true things" in the same language and in the same manner as early Buddhists or even  Buddha himself did.

No, of course we don't. I already pointed that out:

Sure we can relate the Buddhist teachings in modern language and stripped of cultural accretions - as I mainly try to do.

Perhaps you thought I was just interested in chatting and did not bother to read.

It still won't get anyone anywhere unless they do some very hard work on changing themselves.

And this hard work is practice - informed by friends who meditate, through conversation and exchange - not "chatting". This is called Sangha or community. The Buddha said the whole of the spiritual life was spiritual friends. If you really think this website is so dire I wonder why you are hanging out here "chatting"?

Matthew
~oOo~     Tat Tvam Asi     ~oOo~    How will you make the world a better place today?     ~oOo~    Fabricate Nothing     ~oOo~

Morning Dew

  • Guest
Re: Non-Religious Vipassana Board Please :-)
« Reply #29 on: June 01, 2010, 08:07:42 PM »
krishnamurti at best taught buddhism, but the living fountain of that doctrine remains in the suttas.

I kind of felt he thought Taoism  ;D   ;)

mik1e

  • Guest
Re: Non-Religious Vipassana Board Please :-)
« Reply #30 on: June 01, 2010, 08:53:21 PM »
Matthew,

I like this site, because it is "rigorous" enough, and there are many guys here who are really interested in practice.

Regarding this thread, I just wanted people to keep as close to original question as possible. So, I may be a bit "sharp", but not "aggressive". Hope you can see the difference.

At the same time I understand that if somebody does not want to hear you, it is foolish to force him to do so.  My main intent is to help people (e.g., by answering questions), but not simply to communicate with good guys. Such "indulgence in communication" is just a side effect of one of jhanas, which has to be overcome (IMHO).

"Sure we can relate the Buddhist teachings in modern language and stripped of cultural accretions - as I mainly try to do." -- I have read it (now twice :)), but in this thread it is too general, that's why I did not react to it.

What i would like to see in this (or similar) thread: well formulated question(s) about specific state, process or term related to practice, and answer(s) to such question(s) in "modern" language. But I don't see here anything like that (except the first question which started the discussion). That's why I call this type of conversation "chat" -- many words which do not make the main question clearer.

Maybe, I am too strict in my position (then sorry for that) -- actually, I want to see here the same things which I am used to in electronic/programming and scientific forums (though there is a lot of chat there, too :).)



Matthew

  • The Irreverent Buddhist
  • Staff
  • Meditation: It's a D.I.Y. project.
    • KISS: Keep it simple stupid.
    • Getting nowhere slowly and enjoying every moment.
Re: Non-Religious Vipassana Board Please :-)
« Reply #31 on: June 01, 2010, 10:30:40 PM »
Mik1e,

What i would like to see in this (or similar) thread: well formulated question(s) about specific state, process or term related to practice, and answer(s) to such question(s) in "modern" language. But I don't see here anything like that (except the first question which started the discussion). That's why I call this type of conversation "chat" -- many words which do not make the main question clearer.

This thread is an administrative matter regarding the running of the forums. It is not a question of Dhamma or meditation.

As I stated above if anyone wants to start a thread and specify at the top of that thread that they do not want answers in anything other than modern English I will enforce that as rigorously as requested by the OP.

This is a suitable way of achieving Morning Dew's request without splitting the boards. However, this is not my decision at the end of the day. This is a community decision. If a large number of people wish to see the boards split then that is the way we will go.

This is what Jhananda seems to have missed in his lovely thread full of insults towards me based on absolutely **** all: The hard work I do to keep this place running, democratic, participatory and relevant is a Dhamma offering - it is Dana.

What Jhananda did was the same as walking into a friends house and shitting on the floor, then trying to make your friend sit in it and have everyone laugh at him.

If that is what 40 years of Jhana does to you then I can see why many schools avoid the subject - even if they are missing the real point no less than Mr J.

Warmly,

Matthew
~oOo~     Tat Tvam Asi     ~oOo~    How will you make the world a better place today?     ~oOo~    Fabricate Nothing     ~oOo~

mik1e

  • Guest
Re: Non-Religious Vipassana Board Please :-)
« Reply #32 on: June 01, 2010, 11:35:28 PM »
Matthew,

I am not sure, but it seems that you take things too seriously. May it be because of my bad English?

This thread was started with very nice question. So it could make sense to collect here some really interesting information and points of view. This did not happen. It is a bit pity, but let it be so! Now we (i.e. those who's expectation appeared to be too high) can forget about this "problem" (which is not a problem at all, really), and move forward, to new opportunities. Maybe some other thread will become a real gem. That is all what I wanted to say by my posts. Nothing more.

P.S. Please don't take what I write personally. You cannot respond for other people, for their questions and opinions. And when I speak about "other forums" I mean people, i.e. participants of the forum, not the forum keeper.

With best regards,

Michael.

Matthew

  • The Irreverent Buddhist
  • Staff
  • Meditation: It's a D.I.Y. project.
    • KISS: Keep it simple stupid.
    • Getting nowhere slowly and enjoying every moment.
Re: Non-Religious Vipassana Board Please :-)
« Reply #33 on: June 02, 2010, 07:26:36 AM »
Michael,

I'm not taking things too seriously. This thread was an administrative request. I have done my best to answer it.

Just as I will not allow you to sell your services publicly on this site, nor will I continue forever to allow someone who claims to be enlightened continue peddling his ego fuelled wrong views if in doing so he shows the opposite qualities of an enlightened person.

Warmly,

Matthew
~oOo~     Tat Tvam Asi     ~oOo~    How will you make the world a better place today?     ~oOo~    Fabricate Nothing     ~oOo~

Morning Dew

  • Guest
Re: Non-Religious Vipassana Board Please :-)
« Reply #34 on: June 03, 2010, 09:11:22 AM »
if we devote ourselves to the eightfold path, then all the suttas will become clear.

Quote
What of all the rules that the Buddha has passed down to us over the centuries? Accounts have it that just before his death the Buddha entrusted his monks to discard all minor rules, saying he knew they were able to discern the essence of dharma. Overcautious, the monks decided they couldn't decide, and kept all the rules. In effect, they denied the Buddha's last wish. Had Krishnamurti sat in the place of the Buddha, and had he made but one rule, it might have been "know thyself", and all other rules would have been declared to be minor and therefore to be discarded.


Lets mess it up with some more thoughts shall we  ;D

Quote
4. No Path, No Progress, No Goal

"...the bodhisatvas have no attainment, they abide by means of prajnaparamita."

To Krishnamurti there is no "path", no procedures, no organization, and no rules that should be laid down by men for other men to follow on the road to enlightenment. As part of the path, Buddhists must observe a very typical, man-made, structure which begins at the top with The Three Precious Ones: the Buddha, the Dharma, and the Sangha. Each of these pillars has subsets of rules associated with it: The Five Skandhas, The Eight Siddhis, etc. Some would have us believe that learning all these articles of faith are necessary for enlightenment.

Much Buddhist literature suggests that in following Buddhism there is a great object that one must attain and that one progresses towards this goal as one takes each step along the path. To Krishnamurti setting a psychological goal and working for progress in any direction will only lead to more confusion and suffering. Any attempts at psychological self-betterment will amount to no more than just one more futile duplication of many similar past efforts, all of which had previously failed.

The typical pattern of human behavior that we always seem to fall into, perhaps by virtue of conditioning, is the "work for a reward" stereotype. One finds a religion and sees something desirable in it which becomes an object of attainment. The next step is to devise a plan to acquire the object, and finally, with great deliberation we set about to carry out that plan with hard, unrelenting work.

Krishnamurti tells us that the "work for a reward" operandi has been tried countless times by homo sapiens, but it has never led us to anything new or different in the area of spiritual enlightenment. What do we make of all this? Buddhist leaders round the world tell us that there are Buddhist goals and a path of hard work and attainment for reaching these goals.

Here again Krishnamurti seems to be more in agreement with the very core of Buddhist teachings than the Buddhists themselves. The Sutra of the Heart of Transcendent Knowledge sounds more like Krishnamurti than does many of the Buddhist teachers: "There is ... no path, no wisdom, no attainment, and no nonattainment ..." Here Krishnamurti is telling us to live up to the precepts of this great Buddhist Sutra. He is not telling us to follow a path, but to under stand that there is no path. He tells this just as bluntly and simply as the Sutra does. There is no apparent sympathy or embellishments for the benefit of those who either fail to understand or for those who have beliefs in goals to which they must continue to cling.

According to Krishnamurti the person is not important, but what he says is. In many of his writings he pleads and begs the reader not to accept anything on his authority, but instead to undertake a profound inward search to verify the truth (or untruth) of anything he says. Advice with an uncanny similarity appears in the Kalama Sutra where the Buddha says, "Don't believe in me, don't believe in others, don't believe in something because it is written in books, but really see for yourself what practice is conducive to the weakening of greed and delusion."

If we are not to believe in the Buddha, other Buddhists, or Buddhist scriptures then of what value is a Buddhist lineage? Perhaps not much, but Krishnamurti has an answer to this. The only useful function that he could ever claim for himself was, as he put it, as a mirror. He felt that he could help those most in need by reflecting an image of themselves that would be so vivid that no one could fail to recognize the simple fact that our true nature was that of a vast, unlimited emptiness. If Krishnamurti's role for himself were also applicable to Buddhist leaders then the Buddhist clergy would serve better as instruments of reflection rather than reservoirs ready to spout endless dictums: The Six Realms of cyclic existence, The Ten Bhumis, The Four Performances, The Four Noble Truths, and so on and on and on.

What of all the rules that the Buddha has passed down to us over the centuries? Accounts have it that just before his death the Buddha entrusted his monks to discard all minor rules, saying he knew they were able to discern the essence of dharma. Overcautious, the monks decided they couldn't decide, and kept all the rules. In effect, they denied the Buddha's last wish. Had Krishnamurti sat in the place of the Buddha, and had he made but one rule, it might have been "know thyself", and all other rules would have been declared to be minor and therefore to be discarded.


Quoted from;
http://www.buddhanet.net/khrisna.htm

Crystal Palace

  • Member
  • "Move on Bhikkus, Move On" - Buddha
    • Thai Forest Tradition
Re: Non-Religious Vipassana Board Please :-)
« Reply #35 on: June 04, 2010, 04:03:50 PM »
Dear Dusko,

Quote
Most of them are into visualistaion of chakra lights and so on so and so forth

The chakras and visualizations that you talk about are actually advanced stages that need to be given equal attention in the sense that one cannot be dismissive of them. Since you are a beginner, I reckon these discussions might confuse you but you must understand that as you advance on the path you will have to one day go through such stages.

Quote
So I felt to try and ask Admin Matthew and the rest wheather it would be acceptable to open one more board for the non-buddhist like me which have no intention what so ever to get involved into Sutta scriptures and goals toward Enlightment and stories alike.

You have your own Shamatha board. And judging by your understanding of the concepts, it seems to me that you are practicing Shamatha correctly. Therefore, you are already advancing towards the goal of full enlightnment, whether you like it or not.

And what are sutta references? They are just the supposed words of the Buddha - who was against religion, superstition, blind belief, cosmic speculation and the extravagant aspects of meditation. So no reason to agree with you here as well.

Quote
Such board I feel could teach us alot   and would give space for both buddhists and non-buddhist interested in vipassana 

This forum has nothing to do with Buddhists or non Buddhists. The Buddha was not interested in establishing a sect or an organized religion. He was merely concerned about an enquiry into the truth. Therefore in my view a distinction between Buddhists and Non Buddhists on this forum does not exist. It could be that what you mean is that superstitious or ritualistic talk can be avoided. If that is the case, then I am with you. And so is the Buddha and so is Matthew, for blind belief has no place in the practice of meditation. Since such discussions are not encouraged on the forum, I do not see why we should split the boards.   

Quote
I know but most of the meditation boards are named Dhamma and that very much "pushes away" folk that might enter to learn insight meditation but not necesserely learn Dhamma or enter the Buddhist refuge.

Insight meditation is one the most itegral aspects of the Dhamma - and therefore one is learning bits and pieces of the Dhamma if one is practicing insight meditation regularly.

I suppose what you really mean is that you are getting confused with all these Sanskrit/Pali words being thrown around and that is turning you off. But in a lot of cases, using these words is actually beneficial since there are no proper English equivalents for them. For instance, can you tell me what English word I could use if I wanted to refer to the Dhamma, kamma or nibbana?

Instead, I would suggest what Mathew has already suggested to you - that you 'watch' your aversion to these things. That will give you more benefit than a seperated board! :D


If you want questions answered from direct experience and specifically without Buddhist terminology I would encourage you to state that at the start of any threads you want dealt with that way. I will certainly respect any such request and if anyone else doesn't I can just delete those posts for you.


This suggestion makes a lot of sense to me as it can solve your problems Dusko without having to split the Boards.


On the whole, I am against splitting boards as it further breaks down an already small community and deprives a lot of current as well as future visitors to learn some amazing concepts of the Dharma.

Warmly,
Crystal Palace
"Abstain from unwholesome actions,
Perform wholesome actions,
Purify your mind"

Buddha

Crystal Palace

  • Member
  • "Move on Bhikkus, Move On" - Buddha
    • Thai Forest Tradition
Re: Non-Religious Vipassana Board Please :-)
« Reply #36 on: June 04, 2010, 04:07:10 PM »
Reality does not depend on teaching of even the coolest guy

Yes it does. "Cool" is regularly used as a synonym for Nibanna in the Pali Cannon. The "coolest guy" was Shakyamuni Gautama Buddha. What was true in his time is true today and will ever be so.


He was, as the Isley Brothers would have said, 'the real deal'  :D

Warmly,
Crystal Palace
"Abstain from unwholesome actions,
Perform wholesome actions,
Purify your mind"

Buddha

Crystal Palace

  • Member
  • "Move on Bhikkus, Move On" - Buddha
    • Thai Forest Tradition
Re: Non-Religious Vipassana Board Please :-)
« Reply #37 on: June 04, 2010, 04:08:49 PM »

There is a certain amount of familiarity with the style and repetition that makes it easier once you get used to this - the repetition is due to the fact that these texts were transmitted orally for a couple of centuries ... probably a good few slips of the tongue got in there !


hahahaha!!!  :D :D :D
"Abstain from unwholesome actions,
Perform wholesome actions,
Purify your mind"

Buddha

 

Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
3 Replies
2830 Views
Last post December 01, 2007, 11:32:00 PM
by Stefan
2 Replies
3592 Views
Last post December 22, 2007, 01:12:31 PM
by Vipassana_Beginner
9 Replies
3685 Views
Last post December 26, 2008, 11:47:24 AM
by Matthew
14 Replies
3885 Views
Last post July 26, 2010, 07:17:57 PM
by Matthew
18 Replies
7522 Views
Last post September 09, 2010, 09:13:24 PM
by Morning Dew
1 Replies
1494 Views
Last post January 25, 2011, 09:49:27 AM
by Vivek
0 Replies
1698 Views
Last post March 17, 2011, 07:40:14 AM
by Daiho