45 replies to this topic

[Wolfgang]

Dear Sukinder,

Sorry for the marathon post. With metta, Sukin

Sorry? - Are you mad? - Thank you for such a wonderful and lovely post.

'Wolfgang' 'Jun 21 2006, 04:05 PM' '#28':

So now we seem to arrive at a standstill: Were I say that only with formal practice I could see ignorance, as you only could see it with the study of Abhidhamma. - And you insist, ignorance can only by seen by the study of Abhidhamma, and not by 'formal practice'. - So... what to do?

I think now we are both sure to agree that we disagree. Having put so much effort to arrive at this conclusion, I think we both have earned our time off. Anyway, lately we both seem to be the only ones involved in any real discussion here.

My mother just had her second hip joint re-done. Despite, she had to suffer so much pain for so many months. Therefore, I apologize if through anything I said you felt pressured to reply fast in your already stressful situation. I would have been just as glad with your answer in 2 weeks time. However, I really appreciate your love to Dhamma.

With good wishes to all your family members,

Wolfgang

***

Dear Robert,

When the Paramatthaka sutta uses the word ditthi (view) it means wrong view. Robert

Are you saying here I am the only one with wrong view, and only those who studied Abhidhamma have it right? Regards, Wolfgang

Nevertheless, surely Abhidhamma is the Buddha's word, it is part of the Tipitaka. Robert

So that means that you believe those who studied Abhidhamma are those with the right view?
And those who studied the Sutta and 'only' practiced cannot have it? Regards, Wolfgang

Let's move this discussion about Abhidhamma to either this thread ... or this one ... My brief comment is that I agree with Sitagu Sayadaw. Robert

Can one by the study of the Sutta, in your opinion, not arrive at right view? In other words, using your terminology, there is not also Abhidhamma taught in the Sutta, to some extent?

I would really appreciate a straightforward answer. Kind regards, Wolfgang

Please use one of the links in my last post or start a new topis, such as "Does Abhidhamma lead to right view" etc . Otherwise this thread will get crowded with various topics. Thanks, Robert

You just avoided a straight answer by rewording my question to your favors! With half your words you could since long have answered very precisely!

However, no answer - in this context - is a very clear answer!

Thanks.

[sukin]

Dear Sukinder,
Sorry? - Are you mad? - Thank you for such a wonderful and lovely post.
I think now we are both sure to agree that we disagree. Having put so much effort to arrive at this conclusion, I think we both have earned our time off. Anyway, lately we both seem to be the only ones involved in any real discussion here.

Dear Wolfgang,

It appears that you have become very quiet. Yes I think we should agree to disagree, for now at least. But this doesn’t mean that we can’t continue discussing, does it?

I should have mentioned that in spite of our present disagreement, I feel that you do make good contributions to discussions here. Knowing myself to be a worldling often revolving around certain habitual ways of thinking about things, including Dhamma, I feel that I can learn from other perspectives including your own. Besides I continue to discover in me, inclinations not only to wrong view, but also those bordering upon superstition! So indeed I am in need of being instructed from as many good minds as I can meet.

So please Wolfgang, do continue to contribute to this list, perhaps not in this particular thread, but others. I look forward to hearing from you and I feel confident that we can all learn from each other.

With metta,

Sukin

[Wolfgang]

I look forward to hearing from you and I feel confident that we can all learn from each other.

Dear Sukin,

Thanks for your warm welcome.
I agree that the learning effect is best - if one's own assumtions are questioned to the core.
Sure I'll back.

I've been unemployed for quite some time now.
However, unexpectedly, I can start with a new job tomorow - serving asylum seekers.
I am really happy to share the welcome - I already received so many times from mother India - with them.
But initially I'll have a little less time for discussions.

In Dhamma,

Wolfgang

[Wolfgang]

Dear All,

Although a bit off topic in this tread (but otherwise very well related to it) I am musing how it comes, that there are now about 170 members at 'Abhidhamma Vipassana' - however, this thread seems to be the only one viewed already above 2000 times. And that while being inactive for quite some time. While all others met only an avarage of 200 hits?!?

It could be that visiting guest get automatical attracted to the threads with the most hits, and it gets a live of its own. But because on some day's, I return to this forum and the counters are up artificially high - I speculate that there might be some secret propagators of something?

Would just be interested to get some view on this oddity here - to stop my own fantasies about it.

kind regards ..

[RobertK]

I saw that too. I think it is an interesting thread, so probably many return hits. Also I see yourown website links directly to the thread so I guess many come from that.

[RobertK]

Jon abbott:
https://groups.yahoo...messages/146172
---In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, <yenvinnyc@...> wrote :
Hi Jon,
I think that dis-identification of the body came from the intensive observing on the phenomenons of the body for a long time. Then the body became an outsider like you are looking at other's body. A sense of intimacy increases dramatically and yet you know you can let the body go calmly.
--------------------

Jon: Im sure it was a profound experience for you. And it was an experience that related to things about which the Buddha spoke.

However, there is only one right path, and there are many, many paths that give the appearance of going in the right direction but do not in fact do so.

Thats why there needs to be a good theoretical/intellectual grasp from the very beginning of what the Buddha was saying. If the initial practice is not in accordance with the Teachings, the whole exercise is wrong path rather than right path :-)).

Actually, unusual and profound experiences are not uncommon at retreats, due to the intensity of the practice being undertaken.

These experiences are usually confirmed by one of the retreat leaders as indicating progress on the path. This makes it even more difficult to consider at a later date whether the initial practice had been in accordance with the teachings.

Courses of training that focus on a particular aspect of the Teachings as a direct (i.e. simpler and/or speedier) way to deeper understanding must be considered suspect (regardless of the convictions of those presenting them).

To my understanding, the Buddha did not teach that there should be any focussing solely on the dhammas that are taken for the body. And while he did extoll the importance of developing awareness of those dhammas, this is not to be taken as recommending the awareness of those dhammas in preference to, or in isolation from, the awareness of all other dhammas.

(No disrespect to Goenkaji. Just begging to differ (I presume) in the interpretation of the words of the Buddha.)

--------------------
VT: The warning not to jump to any conclusion is very important! In the camp, we are advised not to care about any experiences, they are gone already.
--------------------

Jon: As Im sure you will have realised, it is difficult to let go of such experiences. One is convinced that it must be the real thing, because it seems to relate to things spoken of by the Buddha (and of course the experience has the approval of the retreat leader :-)).

--------------------
VT: Goenkaji only asks us (10 days course) to check if we improve the equanimity; to walk evenly on the uneven. I think this is similar to what Acharn Sujin mentioned about "stand firmly".
--------------------

Jon: Regarding, I think this is similar to what Acharn Sujin mentioned about "stand firmly", a good question to bring up in Vietnam!

To my understanding, greater equanimity is not a gauge of the development of the understanding taught by the Buddha.

--------------------
VT: "it is conditioned dhammas that are not-self, and they are not-self because they are not subject to control/mastery." Yes. This is beautiful. The biggest puzzle for one to solve is that there is no one.
--------------------

Jon: Actually, I think the biggest puzzle to solve is how the development of understanding *begins*. If there is correct understanding of this, then all the other puzzles will be solved in due course :-))

But the key is to keep coming back to the words of the original Teaching as understood by the enlightened beings of the time and explained in the commentaries, and to then consider its true meaning as relating to present moment reality. (No method!)

Jon