[Buddha-l] Shamatha book--clarification

[Piya Tan]

A very effective teaching method of the Buddha that we find in the Suttas is
that
of asking the right questions: we are advised against asking the wrong
questions
(like "Are Martians green?" an example Gethin gave). So, is Batchelor asking
the
right questions?

Now is that question itself a right one? I can see how judgemental I am
inside!
After I have left the order (as a Theravada) monk, I have to think of
earning a living
of supporting myself. Of course being a monk is the easiest way of
self-support,
that is, if one has nothing to offer. But offering nothing (akincana) is not
easy
unless one really has nothing! No views whatever, that is.

Being interestingly different is a good way to attract students, esp when
one is
convinced that it is the right thing to do. There is a problem when one says
that
certain teachings in Buddhism do not work. For such a statement to be trut,
one
should have tried everything Buddhism teaches, which is not an easy thing to
do.
Perhaps this is one reason for being agnostic (I dont know).

However, if we regard karma and rebirth as effective working tools for a
healthy
moral basis as a support for meditation (mental development), there is less
need to
be agnostic. The scientific mind for example actually believes that many if
not all the
scientific theories today are true, but in a generation many of these
"truths" would
be revised or debunked. (Think of science 400 years back and today).

So for the time being this is what I understand of karma and rebirth, but I
do not take
it like the monk who quipped that those "bad" women of Thailand are
suffering from
their past karma. Could I correctly say that those who faithfully serve the
monks in a
local temple were temple slaves before? Are we here reading all that the
Suttas have
to say about karma and rebirth, and also the teachings of the living
masters.

There is a possibility of Buddhism one day ending as a conglomerate of
teachers
without teachees. Every lama his teaching, the Tibetans say. Then again,
during his
last days, the Buddha admonishes us to take the Dharma as refuge, to be our
own
refuge (by which he means of course the practise of the 4 satipatthana,
which liberates
us from the self-notion).

As our understanding of karma and rebirth become focussed and effective,
that new
understanding liberates one from the old one spiralward.

Agnosticism can be a cop-out, a good excuse, for not daring to think beyond
oneself,
of being afraid to make mistake from which one could learn. It is even more
self-serving
(even narcissistic) if it becomes a platform for one's own views or to be
the centred gaze
of countless eyes.

In early Buddhism di.t.thi is always translated as "views" and micchaa
di.t.thi is "wrong
view". I think di.t.thi itself encompasses both "wrong views" and wrong but
helpful views,
that is, an idea although wrong, is what is useful for the time being as
that is what the
audience or people can understand. Ditthi clearly becomes micchaditthi when
the view
is self-serving and narcissistic. (If you can find a Buddhist teacher who is
not narcissistic,
he is wonderfully healing and liberating to listen to.)

So that Buddha uses views so that we can grow out of them. It is like taking
food, and
when you are full, you stop eating. Understanding things this way, texts
like the
Alagaddupama Sutta (the parable of the raft) makes great sense. And of
course some
personal experience of inner stillness through mindfulness practice.

It is all right to be mogha,purisa (hollow women and hollow men) as long as
you are aware
that you are hollow, seeking to be filled. Let me try this, is better than
saying "I don't know."
May we fill ourselves with the right stuff.

Please remember it is

Happy Vesak!

Piya Tan



On 5/26/07, curt <curt at cola.iges.org> wrote:
>
> Christopher Fynn wrote:
>
> >
> > IMO *deliberately* trying to create a "Western Buddhism", "American
> > Buddhism", "Agnostic Buddhism" or whatever (and especially thinking or
> > claiming that this is somehow "superior" or more rational) is just as
> > delusional as dressing up "in all of the appropriate regalia" and
> > trying to become a "mock Tibetan or pseudo-Japanese".
> >
> >
> The key word (already emphasized by Chris) is "deliberately". Often
> people who are interested in such deliberations are fond of
> "evolutionary" metaphors ("Buddhism must evolve" - or some such
> nonsense). And usually people who are fond of evolutionary metaphors are
> blissfully unaware of the fact that random mutations are the raw
> material of evolution - and that 99.9% of these mutations result in one
> of the following: (1) no visible change whatsoever (the best case) (2)
> horrible fatal deformities, or (3) cancer.
>
> Besides, the Buddha wasn't raised Buddhist - and T.H. Huxley wasn't
> raised Agnostic. That tells you all you need to know about the logic
> behind the supposed "unsustainability" of moving beyond "our own culture."
>
> But back to the original subject of the thread. Here is a very
> interesting review by Jack Petranker of Alan Wallace's "The Taboo of
> Subjectivity". One fascinating thing about this review is that it deals
> with the whole question of whether or not true introspection is possible
> - and the fact that Wallace takes the orthodox Gelugpa position of the
> supposed impossibility of true mental self-reflection, as opposed to the
> far more reasonable Nyingma position (at least as espoused by Mipham) -
> which I prefer if only because it fits in better with my Platonic
> tendencies. If I follow what Petranker is saying, Wallace stakes out
> (or, in Petranker's words "is forced into") the position that
> "retrospection" allows for a kind of "virtual" mental self-reflection. I
> believe some Stoics found themselves forced into a similar position, and
> for similar reasons. This link is directly to the pdf of the article:
> http://www.imprint.co.uk/pdf/taboo.pdf
>
> - Curt
> _______________________________________________
> buddha-l mailing list
> buddha-l at mailman.swcp.com
> http://mailman.swcp.com/mailman/listinfo/buddha-l
>



-- 
The Minding Centre
Blk 644 Bukit Batok Central #01-68 (2nd flr)
Singapore 650644
Website: dharmafarer.googlepages.com
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mailman.swcp.com/mailman/private/buddha-l/attachments/20070526/d4839975/attachment.html