Insight meditation and the Satipatthana sutta

[Gem]

Originally Posted by blossomingtree

I doubt that.



Authority is not because of robes and title - it's a simple matter of practice and manifestation/realization. There is such a thing as expertise, whether that is in martial arts, spirituality or cooking.



Buddhism is not - despite what you infer - a belief or intellectual based approach or religion. It is based on practice, and realization/manifestation - the Buddha outlined his approach in the Four Noble Truths which outline a way to the cessation of dukkha - the Eightfold Path is eminently practical and requires no belief system or rigidity/dogma. There is nothing philosophical in the Satiphatthana. It is your continued assertion that your beliefs are superior to Buddhist teachings that render these arguments superfluous and misguided, in my opinion.

To talk abut the Satipatthana in a deeper way remaining with Buddhist contexts would require discussion of the wider teachings.

You mistake respect for "dog-like" - it is very simple, if someone wants to learn martial arts, they might sign up for classes with Bruce Lee. If they listen and respect Bruce Lee, it is because guidance and truth is appreciated, it has nothing to do with "sitting like a puppy before its master in wait for some delectable treat" - this actually (again) reveals your arrogance at your own beliefs and the inferred reverse arrogance at anyone who appreciates and respects the teachings of genuine Masters.

I can only suggest that this is a Buddhist thread and it would be appropriate to practice right speech.

You keep inventing confusion by inventing arguments such as "don't listen to Bruce Lee if you want to master martial arts" when there is nothing wrong with utilizing tips and training techniques of masters. Again, Buddhism is not a belief based system per se but as I said in another thread, faith naturally arises when one puts the teachings into practice. You keep trying to assert your own superiority, "teaching" people lessons you have learnt when they are admirable, but elementary.

I read yesterday that Ronalda Cristiano believed that the tax authorities were going after him because "insects will always attack glow" and it is his name/light that is the reason why the tax authorities are reviewing his taxes.
(something like that!) And actually the reason was much simpler - if there was tax evasion, then the tax authorities would go after him.

Likewise, in your case, it has nothing to do with not having robes or a title.

You claim things such as limitation of practice, that you don't exist, that sila is the first teaching, anatta is only a general principle etc. These points are not disputed because you don't wear robes, it's simply not consistent with the Buddha's guidance and the realization of the many Masters, which ironically enough, are not contradictory in outcome.



Yes.



This is just simple awareness/meditation experience - first base as I said, in Buddhism. Buddhism goes far beyond this in potentiality and outcome.



You sell Buddhism short by imagining that it is so limited. Nibbana is not a myth. Nor is dependent origination.



This is also because you cannot "take" speech which agitates your mind - as seen in the past, you take any disagreements as personal assaults on your personhood, which you claim doesn't exist. The contradictions are there because, with due respect to your fantastic practice, the practice is still elementary.

BT

[FallingLeaves]

Originally Posted by blossomingtree

Fine sentiment, but should also note you say this because you cannot "take" speech which agitates your mind - as seen in the past, you take any disagreements as personal assaults on your personhood, which you claim doesn't exist. The contradictions are there because, with due respect to your fantastic practice, the practice is still elementary.

BT

so... then... you would be of these 'teachers' that you claim we should have fealty to, that you can tell us all about our own foibles without feeling a need to examine your own motivation for doing so?

pardon me for saying so, but this is exactly the reason I don't want a teacher. much better to be lost in an 'elementary' practice then go off with a 'bad' teacher, in my book.

[Gem]

Originally Posted by FallingLeaves

so... then... you would be of these 'teachers' that you claim we should have fealty to, that you can tell us all about our own foibles without feeling a need to examine your own motivation for doing so?

pardon me for saying so, but this is exactly the reason I don't want a teacher. much better to be lost in an 'elementary' practice then go off with a 'bad' teacher, in my book.

I always found the guidance of my teachers helpful, but they understood the importance of discernment and self determination and the necessity that people understand through their own insight. In the practical instruction, they give reason to explain why the practice is the way it is, and in the evening, a more philosophical discourse is given so that people understand the principles of meditation in a more fundamental way. In this way, people are empowered by their own purpose from within themselves to motivate practice, rather than just doing as they are told.

Here I digress somewhat from the topic subject, but I suppose it is important for us all not to become docile and obedient or believe anything because 'Buddha said'. It is important to remain free of mind, free of influence, and rest only one's own self-determination. Perhaps in open mindedness, we might accept something in principle because the reasoning behind it seems to make sense, but only take it on board in ones life if it's been tested by oneself and found to be true. Yes. I mention it as an aside, but I think well worth mentioning.

[blossomingtree]

Originally Posted by Gem

To talk abut the Satipatthana in a deeper way remaining with Buddhist contexts would require discussion of the wider teachings.

Actually, the Satipatthana is practical, and stands alone as a meditation guide in the Theravadan school.

https://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipi....010.than.html

Originally Posted by Gem

I can only suggest that this is a Buddhist thread and it would be appropriate to practice right speech.

In your case, you use Right Speech as a shield and defence mechanism so it is dishonest and untrue. You will find more respect when you can be honest and truthful. http://www.spiritualforums.com/vb/sh...79#post1683279

BT

[blossomingtree]

Originally Posted by FallingLeaves

so... then... you would be of these 'teachers' that you claim we should have fealty to, that you can tell us all about our own foibles without feeling a need to examine your own motivation for doing so?

pardon me for saying so, but this is exactly the reason I don't want a teacher. much better to be lost in an 'elementary' practice then go off with a 'bad' teacher, in my book.

Hi FL

I have never claimed that you need to have fealty to anyone, least of all me. On this forum, we are all peers, and we speak as such. When I see blatant misrepresentation I have the right to speak up - as you do - and as you have - which I respect you for.

You don't have to convince me of whether you want a teacher or not On the opening premise of this particular thread, it is said such things as "don't believe what Buddha said but believe what I say". This is in a long line of similar posts by the OP.

It's quite simple - for mastery of martial arts, there are such things as Adepts and Masters. There are intermediate folks and beginners, and there are subtle errors - these are all a matter of course but also par for the course.

Take care, dear friend.

BT

[Gem]

Originally Posted by blossomingtree

Actually, the Satipatthana is practical, and stands alone as a meditation guide in the Theravadan school.

https://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/mn/mn.010.than.html

Yes, the accesstoinsight publication is like the abridged version, and I should have been more specific before, but when I say 'the satipatthana' I actually mean the Maha Satipatthana Sutta. I have a pdf here http://nrcvee.iitd.ac.in/files/sutta...na-english.pdf

If there is a specific area you'd like to discuss, that would be well aligned with the topic of the thread, and I'm here to talk about such things.

[Gem]

Originally Posted by blossomingtree

Hi FL

I have never claimed that you need to have fealty to anyone, least of all me. On this forum, we are all peers, and we speak as such. When I see blatant misrepresentation I have the right to speak up - as you do - and as you have - which I respect you for.

You don't have to convince me of whether you want a teacher or not On the opening premise of this particular thread, it is said such things as "don't believe what Buddha said but believe what I say". This is in a long line of similar posts by the OP.

Putting something in quote marks indicates that I said it. I never said that. I spoke abut the importance of discernment, and the folly of blind faith. It follows that no one should believe anything I say.

It's quite simple - for mastery of martial arts, there are such things as Adepts and Masters. There are intermediate folks and beginners, and there are subtle errors - these are all a matter of course but also par for the course.

Take care, dear friend.

BT

[blossomingtree]

Originally Posted by Gem

Yes, the accesstoinsight publication is like the abridged version, and I should have been more specific before, but when I say 'the satipatthana' I actually mean the Maha Satipatthana Sutta. I have a pdf here http://nrcvee.iitd.ac.in/files/sutta...na-english.pdf

If there is a specific area you'd like to discuss, that would be well aligned with the topic of the thread, and I'm here to talk about such things.

Wrong word - right.

The Buddha delivered the discourse to an assembly of monks at Kammassadharma, a market town of the Kuru people in northwest India near modern Delhi.

It seems likely that he discussed practices mentioned in the sutra many times in other places during his forty-five year teaching career.

Three early versions are known. What is considered the primary sutra is the Pali Satipatthana Sutta (number 10 in the Majjhiman Nikaya) and Mahasatipatthana Sutta (number 20 in the Digha Nikaya), which are exactly the same, except the latter has added text at the end on the Four Noble Truths (these are the short and long Pali forms).

Either one or the other of these texts is considered Version One of the three available versions and possibly the discourse delivered by the Buddha at Kammassadharma; it is said to have been first written down on palm leafs in Sri Lanka in c.100 BCE.

The Sutras are the same - except one is the longer version and has the Four Noble Truths included.

Here is the Access to Insight link which is a succint translation:

https://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipi...22.0.than.html

Both versions are practically oriented, and not philosophical per se. YMMV.

I will read your discussions on it with others as I am interested in these topics. Thank you.

BT

[blossomingtree]

Originally Posted by Gem

Putting something in quote marks indicates that I said it. I never said that. I spoke abut the importance of discernment, and the folly of blind faith. It follows that no one should believe anything I say.

OK well now we know it's not important to discern for oneself.

More seriously:

Buddhism doesn't (by virtue of the religion itself) promote or ask for blind faith at all and actively promotes practical discernment, so I think it is one of the most eminently practicable ones and one which doesn't active encourage a belief (only) based system - but one which is to be known, practiced, and experientially realized for oneself.

In fact, the Buddha himself said this to a group of searchers (not disciples):

"So, as I said, Kalamas: 'Don't go by reports, by legends, by traditions, by scripture, by logical conjecture, by inference, by analogies, by agreement through pondering views, by probability, or by the thought, "This contemplative is our teacher." When you know for yourselves that, "These qualities are skillful; these qualities are blameless; these qualities are praised by the wise; these qualities, when adopted & carried out, lead to welfare & to happiness" — then you should enter & remain in them.' Thus was it said. And in reference to this was it said.

Kalama Sutra

He also likened the teachings to a raft. To be used to cross the ocean of suffering and not to be carried around for the sake of it (as another burden/attachment )

This doesn't mean that people need to go about discounting the raft or telling people to ignore it and not name it or selling a small log as superior to the raft or breaking up the raft so that others can't cross etc.

BT

[blossomingtree]

The Parable of the Quotation Marks

Mark 1: "anything goes"

- Figure of speech

Mark 2: "don't believe what Buddha said but believe what I say"

- Figure of speech:

Originally Posted by Gem

"As we are ardent in the truth, nothing is true because 'Buddha said'. The greater the authority we mindlessly believe and obey, the less we are empowered in discernment. The wise may speak as they do, but without any authority what-so-ever, because no one can have insight for you - only you can truly realise.

It's hard to know what to say because if I talk about the specifics of practice technique, I'd be contradicting a lot of teachers, and as they have authority signified by robes and titles, their 'word against mine' would make me wrong. Hence talking on specifics of practice would be futile."

etc. etc.

BT