Kirjoittaja Aihe: Pragmaattinen dharma ja herääminen  (Luettu 10919 kertaa)

Kalansilmätorni

  • Viestejä: 119
  • http://www.mikseri.net/artists/7000yt.150176.php
Vs: Pragmaattinen dharma ja herääminen
« Vastaus #180 : Kesäkuu 03, 2017, 02:31:01 ap »
Siitä saa tosi hauskan lorun, nauramatta on vaikea päästä loppuun :
(tässä lorussa kumotaan neljä äärimmäistä):

ei on ei ei ei on on on ei ei ei on ei ei

Sen voi sanoa, jos nappaa hännästä kiinni itsessä esimerkiksi konkretisoimispyrkimyksen tai uskoa olemassaoloon jne. Ja naurun kanssa huuhtoutuu pois sitä uskomusta kans.
Hauskempi käyttötapa kuin filosofoinnin ja sitä kautta vain älyllisyyden jälleenkäynnistys.
Kokeilkaa, kokeilkaa :D


Tomi

  • Viestejä: 408
Vs: Pragmaattinen dharma ja herääminen
« Vastaus #181 : Elokuu 28, 2017, 06:16:31 ip »
Buddha antaa suttissa myös ohjeet siitä, miten voi tulla tietoiseksi jonkun henkilön henkisen kehityksen tasoista.

"Monks, these four traits may be known by means of four [other] traits. Which four?

"It's through living together that a person's virtue may be known, and then only after a long period, not a short period; by one who is attentive, not by one who is inattentive; by one who is discerning, not by one who is not discerning.

"It's through dealing with a person that his purity may be known, and then only after a long period, not a short period; by one who is attentive, not by one who is inattentive; by one who is discerning, not by one who is not discerning.

"It's through adversity that a person's endurance may be known, and then only after a long period, not a short period; by one who is attentive, not by one who is inattentive; by one who is discerning, not by one who is not discerning.

"It's through discussion that a person's discernment may be known, and then only after a long period, not a short period; by one who is attentive, not by one who is inattentive; by one who is discerning, not by one who is not discerning.


[1] "'It's through living together that a person's virtue may be known, and then only after a long period, not a short period; by one who is attentive, not by one who is inattentive; by one who is discerning, not by one who is not discerning': Thus was it said. And in reference to what was it said?

"There is the case where one individual, through living with another, knows this: 'For a long time this person has been torn, broken, spotted, splattered in his actions. He hasn't been consistent in his actions. He hasn't practiced consistently with regard to the precepts. He is an unprincipled person, not a virtuous, principled one.' And then there is the case where one individual, through living with another, knows this: 'For a long time this person has been untorn, unbroken, unspotted, unsplattered in his actions. He has been consistent in his actions. He has practiced consistently with regard to the precepts. He is a virtuous, principled person, not an unprincipled one.'

"'It's through living together that a person's virtue may be known, and then only after a long period, not a short period; by one who is attentive, not by one who is inattentive; by one who is discerning, not by one who is not discerning': Thus was it said. And in reference to this was it said.


jne.

http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/an/an04/an04.192.than.html

« Viimeksi muokattu: Elokuu 28, 2017, 06:20:31 ip kirjoittanut Tomi »

Seagal

  • Ihminen
  • Viestejä: 265
Vs: Pragmaattinen dharma ja herääminen
« Vastaus #182 : Syyskuu 24, 2017, 08:58:59 ip »
Vituttaa aika paljon lukea sutrista otettuja pitkiä lainauksia, joista sitten pitäisi kairata esiin kirjoittajan olennainen pointti. Mikä ikinä se on sitten ollutkaan. Onhan se kätevää, että voi copy + pasteta aina silloin tällöin jonkin oivalluksen, mutta olisi vielä kivempaa, jos sen ilmaisi jotenkin omin sanoin "tänään tajusin asian x, josta päättelin y:n, zeta oli olennainen työkalu prosessissa."

Pitkät lainaukset sellaisenaan (imo) ovat aika turhia, ja itse ainakin skippaan, koska kontekstin ymmärtämiseksi pitäisi lukea 15min vielä lisää sisältöä mukaan pastetusta linkistä. Enkä usko, että kovin moni muukaan saa niistä paljoa irti.

Tomi

  • Viestejä: 408
Vs: Pragmaattinen dharma ja herääminen
« Vastaus #183 : Syyskuu 26, 2017, 10:12:52 ap »
Vituttaa aika paljon lukea sutrista otettuja pitkiä lainauksia, joista sitten pitäisi kairata esiin kirjoittajan olennainen pointti. Mikä ikinä se on sitten ollutkaan. Onhan se kätevää, että voi copy + pasteta aina silloin tällöin jonkin oivalluksen, mutta olisi vielä kivempaa, jos sen ilmaisi jotenkin omin sanoin "tänään tajusin asian x, josta päättelin y:n, zeta oli olennainen työkalu prosessissa."

Pitkät lainaukset sellaisenaan (imo) ovat aika turhia, ja itse ainakin skippaan, koska kontekstin ymmärtämiseksi pitäisi lukea 15min vielä lisää sisältöä mukaan pastetusta linkistä. Enkä usko, että kovin moni muukaan saa niistä paljoa irti.

Pointti siinä, että Shakyamuni oli sitä mieltä ihmisen oivalluksen näkeminen on hyvin hankalaa, ettei se onnistu edes häneltä itseltään. Että ihmisen kehityksen huomaa siitä miten hän käyttäytyy toisten ihmisten parissa, miten hän puhuu opista ja miten on maailmassa. Samaa puhuu jokainen opettaja joka on aiheesta suunsa aukaissut.

Tässä ketjussa esiintyy kuitenkin sankari, joka kertoo saaneensa kyvyn nähdä valokuvista ihmisten kehityksen vaiheet ja laittelee web-sivuillaan eri traditioiden opettajie valaistumisjärjestykseen. Sanomatta selvää että itsensä hän rankkaa aika lailla kärkeen.

Tomi

  • Viestejä: 408
Vs: Pragmaattinen dharma ja herääminen
« Vastaus #184 : Marraskuu 28, 2017, 03:23:58 ip »
Täällä ihan hyvä arvostelu tuosta Ingramin kirjasta, joka oikeastaan aika paljon tuon Pragmaattisen dharman -takana. Nykyään tosin sen parissa on ymmärtääkseni jo aika paljon erilaistakin ajattelua eikä Ingram itsekään taida ajatella ihan samalla tavalla kuin kirjaa kirjoittaessa, mutta kuitenkin suuri osa tästä pätee yhä:

---

There is so much right with this book, yet so much wrong. What is right is the unashamed attitude that the path is practiced to attain something, and that it is possible to do so. The discussions of the different models of awakening and of the "mushroom factor" in much of current Buddhism are also great. In Part I there are also extended and very good discussions of some of the important basic teachings of the Buddha: the three trainings, five spiritual faculties, seven factors of enlightenment, four noble truths and eightfold path.

What is wrong then?

Well, Parts II and II are largely not teachings of the Buddha, core or otherwise. The meditation practice that Ingram teaches ("noting") was developed in the twentieth century in Burma. It wasn't taught by the Buddha. The "Progress of Insight" that Ingram teaches comes from a document called the Visuddhimagga written in Sri Lanka in the fifth century AD, more than eight hundred years after the Buddha's death in Northern India. The Buddha didn't teach that either. So the title is misleading, but that doesn't necessarily mean that the practices are not helpful. Or does it?

The outcome of the practice recommended in the book is not the outcome of practicing the Buddha's teaching, which is nibbana ("unbinding"), the end of dukkha (usually translated as "suffering" or "stress"). The product of Ingram's practice as recommended in this book is a state of endless cycling through something which Ingram, borrowing from St John of the Cross, calls the Dark Night, some of whose stages are Fear, Misery, Disgust and Desire for Deliverance (as well as nicer sounding states like Equanimity). There is no end to be reached, just a state of endless repetition of these stages at four succeedingly higher levels which are called by the same names as the Buddha's four stages of awakening, although they are clearly not the same thing at all. Rather than being the end of dukkha which the Buddha taught, this is more "being OK with dukkha made worse by the practice". It seems difficult to understand why anybody would want to do this, unless it's to get the same kind of satisfaction that you get from ascending the levels in a computer game. Ingram even has the term "technical meditator" for someone who can call up these stages of the Dark Night at will, almost as a show of skill. It seems to have little to do with the end of suffering, which is supposed to be the whole point of meditative practice.

The fact that the expected practice outcome is cycling though dukkha is not made clear in the book. The reader is allowed to assume that the objective is the same as the Buddha's, nibbana. It only becomes apparent from Ingram's website. This website has attracted people who appreciated the open and pragmatic ethos of the book and is one of the most hospitable places on the internet for discussion of dhamma practice. The differences between the teaching in this book (usually called "MCTB") and those of the Buddha are openly acknowledged on the site, including the fact that "MCTB arahat" (Ingram's claim to attainment) is not the same as "sutta arahat" (as described in the Pali suttas, the record of the Buddha's teaching conversations during his life) and the fact that the MCTB map is not the same as the Buddha's "ten fetter model".

Ingram himself has recognised that he has further to go (which "sutta arahats" don't) and a couple of years ago started practices inspired by a teaching called Actual Freedom, coached by some of his former pupils. Part of this practice is attaining states called "Pure Consciousness Experiences" ("PCEs") and Ingram has written freely about his attainment of these states and the fact that the experience of "PCE Daniel" is far preferable to that of "cycling Daniel". More recently he has written about a "veil" being torn away that had existed unknown between him and the world.

It seems to be emerging that the "Space Invaders / shooting aliens" noting practice (you'll have to read the book!) that Ingram teaches is what produces the "attention wave", "phase problems" and the perceptual instabilities and vibrations that he calls the Three Characteristics (the Buddha actually never used this term, and meant something different by the term Three Perceptions which he used) and it's what pushes people into the Dark Night. The Buddha taught a very different whole-body awareness practice that did not separate samatha (calm and concentration) and vipassana (insight) and he described nothing remotely resembling the Dark Night. There are many discussions on the website involving people trying to locate themselves on the Progress of Insight map and more often than not it seems difficult or impossible to do. There have been discussions placing the same person right at the beginning and right at the end of the Progress based on the same practice report, so vague and confusing are the signs of each stage. People seem to end up scripting their experience to follow the maps as far as they can, or dropping the maps altogether and taking up other practices that they find more helpful.

Ingram is in the process of starting to prepare a second edition of the book and it will be interesting to see whether he still teaches the practice leading to the dark night (in contrast to the Buddha's practice leading to the end of suffering) or puts it aside in favour of his more recent and apparently more productive practice. If he retains the current content hopefully he will at least correct the title to something less misleading.

For a serious practitioner this is a "must read", not just for its historical interest as a stage of the development of the teaching of the dhamma in the West, but also for its analysis of many of the problems of modern Buddhism. We must be grateful to Ingram for opening up a discussion of dhamma practice based on the idea that you're doing it for a purpose and you can get results. However, the practices described in this book are not those of the Buddha and they do not lead where he went.

https://www.amazon.com/gp/customer-reviews/R3UYN84RDVJXBL/ref=cm_cr_arp_d_rvw_ttl?ie=UTF8&ASIN=B005TQU7P8