| POSTED BY | Subject: Meditation Without A Teacher |
| Palitha Anuruddha Mannapp
23rd March 2000 |
Dear group, I am Palitha (40) from Sri Lanka. A Buddhist by birth as you can imagine.I started practicing buddhist meditation about 9 years ago from whatever the knowledge I gained from reading books and from sermons.I never thought seriously about leraning meditation under the watchful eye of a teacher. I was focusing on Anapanasati for about 5 or 6 years. Just about 30 mts to 1hr morning and evening.Since I was a ship's officer the environment was conducive for meditation. Towards the latter part of it I became more and more interested in Vipassana, but still without a teacher.There were clear signs to show that my temper and mindfulness greatly improved after I started my practice. Also another thing happened as mind became more sensitive. I was becoming worried over illnesses. Even a minor ailment started worrying me a lot. I am not sure whether I was showing signs of a hypochondriac. To overcome this anxiety I inclined more towards meditation practice without much success. Then after talking to some meditation masters I realised that it is dangerous to do what I did without proper guidance. So the current situation is that apart from Metta Bhavana I have stopped doing vipassana. I will let it go like this and start all over again under the gudance of a teacher. Since I found this site today I thought I should share my experience.I am looking forward to seeing your ideas and comments about this topic. May the triple gem bless you. |
| James Gough 23rd March 2000 |
Thank you Palitha for an important post.My own experience is that bare attention to depressive mental states is often very difficult and I wonder whether such practices as metta might not be the antidote. I would like to see other comments. Jim Jim Gough, University of Calgary, Canada. |
| Tin Htoon 23rd March 2000 |
Dear Palitha, I am glad that you are interested in Vipassana meditation and have been doing Anapana meditation for quite some time. It is not advisable to practice meditation, whether it be Anapana or Vipassana without a "Qualified" teacher. I have emphasized the word QUALIFIED as this is extremely important. One should not teach meditation by reading books. One need to establish himself in the practice first and only then should assist others by teaching them. I am from Myanmar and residing in the States. Myanmar Sayadaws (Bhante) excel in the teaching of Vipassana meditation. In the Theravada circle, Myanmar monks are famous for mastering in both the Pariyatti (theory) and Patipatti (practice, especially Vipassana). One of the famous Vipassana meditation masters, Mahasi Sayadaw was able to reintroduce Vipassana practice in Sri Lanka and Thailand. However, I came to know that the group in Sri Lanka couldn't keep up with the practice and that they do not have any more centers teaching Vipassana meditation in Mahasi tradition. However, Guruji S.N. Goenka has reintroduced Vipassana meditation in India and Sri Lanka as well as in many countries around the world. Goenkaji was born and brought up as a Hindu in Myanmar and later learned Vipassana under a great lay-person meditation master Sayagyi U Ba Khin. He went back to India in 1965 and since then he has been teaching Vipassana meditation. His headquarters is in Mumbai area. It is known as Dhamma Giri in Igatpuri which is (3) hours by train, north of Mumbai. Telephone number there is [91](2553)84076, 84302, 84086. Their E-mail is dhamma@bom6.vsnl.net.in. Their web site is www.vri.dhamma.org. They also have many centers in India. The center in Sri Lanka is known as "Vipassana Center, Dhamma Kuta, Mowbray, Hindagala, Peradeniya. Tel. is [94](8)234649, Fax is (1)573 054. The best thing will be for you to contact them and find out their program so that you can join the (10) days retreat and learn the meditation technique. I wish you all the best so that you will be able to learn the Vipassana meditation practice properly and that the practice will lead you to the cessation of sufferings. May you enjoy real peace, real harmony and real happiness. Tin Htoon |
| Robert Kirkpatrick 24th March |
Dear Jim, This does bring up some important points. Here is a section from an earlier posting of mine: "It is sometimes thought that one should be calm first and then develop understanding; but actually the satipatthana sutta (the sutta which describes the objects suitable for direct insight) includes even unwholesome phenomena such as boredom, anger, fear and lust. When these unwholesome states can be seen as they really are, as merely conditioned moments, then they can be understood. It perhaps goes to far to say that we should encourage fear or depression. But especially if we habitually try to avoid facing such unpleasant realities then we may need to make extra effort to understand them. The more they are seen as they are – as conditioned phenomena , just like any other dhamma (reality, phenomenon), the less they disturb us. If we learn from them they are no longer enemies they are friends. The more often they arise the more we learn from them. The main point is that any dhamma is just a dhamma. It arises because it has to arise (there is no self who can control conditions). It can be understood. Of course it is not just a matter of deciding to “face up to fear or aversion or depression”- that is Self. It depends on conditions whether such insight will arise, but by understanding that any dhamma is merely an evanescent phenomenon, and that it can be insighted then this is a supporting condition for awareness of these realities." "Bare awareness" is not such an easy mental state to have. It has to have the right conditions to arise. The most important of these is right understanding. If there is not sufficient understanding then it is possible that what we think is awareness is an imitation. Lobha (desire) comes in many degrees and because it can come with very subtle pleasant feeling it can be mistaken, in its most refined forms, for sati, awareness. It takes a lot of circumspection to develop the path correctly. Vipassana is not merely some special meditation technique. It takes countless lives to develop the understanding to become enlightened. We have to listen to the teachings, consider them, apply them, test them, again and again, life after life. But little by little, if we are patient, understanding grows. Where are we at this moment? Would we like to be near the end? Do we hope that we are near the end? This is just desire- the second Noble Truth. I hope this isn't discouraging. Any moment we we are understanding more about dhammas is a moment that we are walking the same path that all the arahants of the past have taken. The understanding may not yet be as deep as we would like but it is better to have a little of the real one than to go very fast in the wrong direction. Robert |
| Sparklestar 24th March |
Dear Robert, Thank you for this excellent post and reminder of the necessity to continue to read the Buddha's words as one practises. Like Palitha, I too have experienced brushes with anxiety over the actions of the body, over this pain or that strange feeling. I also have experienced many "strange" and seemingly synchronistic visions/actions. What is common to all of these experiences (for me) is attachment to self as experiencing these things. This is often difficult to recognize at the time of the experience. The antidote is without a doubt, knowledge of the Buddha's teachings. The other extreme is all study! I have been there too :) Many, many, are the nights when I have read and made notes and re-read for hours on end! I must have files enough to fill a small library. Sometimes I read the words out loud in Pali and English (to myself) - the beauty is beyond compare. Then I begin to notice that the cerebral has become weighty, usually when my sitting time is supplanted and I see my shrine more and more in passing! At such times I again realize how strong is this ego, this attachment to a self who enjoys words, sounds, intellectual knowledge. The Middle Path begs footsteps each and every day. My feet, tending to step off on the right and on the left, require mindfulness of action and intent. Each swing to extreme provides dhamma to be seen. Each swing to extreme is the actual experience of knowing the value of the Middle Path, a Path not so easily walked (by this practisioner). Thanks again, sparklestar |
| Sparklestar 24th March |
One who has a teacher is most fortunate. But I think the ultimate Teacher is the practise itself as delineated without fault by Buddha (Tipitika). I see the various methodologies of meditation practise (and there are many) as helpful in terms of guidelines or initial structuring. But ultimately the most important is the doing of the work individually without attachment to one style or another. Metta, sparklestar sparklestar Wait for the illuminating openness, as though your chest were filling with light, as when God said, Did we not expand you? (The Essential Rumi, p. 255) |
| Gavin Turner 25th March |
dear robert, i particularly enjoyed reading your email. your comments about the difficulties of using language in describing a 'truth' were very true. although it did appear in early nikaya texts the madhyamika school of indian mahayana thought expanded alot on this idea, by referring to the 'two truths'. conventional truth is necessary to explain and teach the ultimate truth-the empty nature of reality. language such as i, we, you, etc is necessary to discuss concepts relating to the false notion of a self, for instance. and like nagarjuna went to great pains to point out, any 'truth' that you try and describe the reality of, by doing this you are necessarily 'freezing' the very thing you are trying to teach. upaya-skillful means-is something gotama the buddha used to help sentient beings of all different persuasions to understand the dhamma. we can only work at this, of course! may all beings experience true peace and happiness in their lives gavin |
| Robert Kirkpatrick 25th March |
Gavin wrote "to initially learn vipassnana bhavana you must be in the presence of a qualified teacher. like all of the dhamma it can only be comprehended and benefited from to a certain degree if it just remains at the intellectual levl. so reading books about vipassana may satisfy some mental curiousity you have and might go some way to explaining the technique, but naturally the fruits of vipassana will only begin to occur when you practice in the right way. and like someone else noted, once you have this understanding of the technique gained through a retreat, most likely, then you should be able to practice vipassana in your daily life." I see the sense in this statement and yet it makes me a little uneasy. How much weight should we give to individual teachers? In the parinibbana sutta the Buddha said words to the effect that we should not take anyone as our teacher but that we should rely on ourself and let the Dhamma be our guide. Don’t get me wrong I have teachers of my own – and certainly respect them. Yet this respect is not based on reputation – it is from literally hundreds of hours of discussion with them on fine points of Dhamma. I have come to appreciate their insight. Yet even now after many years I still try to weigh up every point. I ask them for clarification and also sutta and commentarial referenes to back up what they say. My main source is still the Tipitaka and then testing for myself. No moment is excluded as a potential object for insight. Thus even when we are reading say a novel there are still moments when sati can arise and directly experience a reality as it is: as merely as dhamma . If it is truly a moment of sati at the level of satipatthana then there is no “me” having this sati. Not me making it happen, no subtle idea of control, of “bringing” sati up. But I think you know this already as your meditation master would have explained this. But especially when we study the Tipitika conditions can quite naturally arise for direct insight. People sometimes wonder how it is that so many monks , nuns, laypeople and devas could become enlightened just while listening to a Dhamma talk from the Buddha or one of his followers. Firstly it is because they have fulfilled the parami and developed the necessary supporting conditions over many aeons. They developed understanding and other wholesome qualities whenever the opportunity arose, while working, while thinking, while playing. Sometimes under ideal conditions of solitude and quiet, other times admist pain, fear and illness- they must have been so brave not to stop half way, content with some minor achievement. Sometimes they went awry, they did evil, or briefly followed a misguided teaching, maybe even an imitation Buddhist practise. But they had developed the parami of sacca, truth, to such an extent that they could not be fool themselves by overestimating any state. They soon saw that any unusual experience or calm state was no indication of insight. Especially they listened, studied, and applied the teachings that they received during Buddhs sasana after Buddha sasana. Further than this the Dhamma itself is the foundation for insight. Thus hearing the Dhamma, for those developed ones, was an immediate condition for direct insight into namas and rupas and they were able to progress through the stages of insight so rapidly. A similar processs can happen with us. We are not as wise as those quick ones at the Buddha’s time but we have an interest in the Dhamma. This is not accidental. It is because of past interest and past insight. When we study the Tiptika we may come to realize that every word the Buddha used was perfectly spoken. It was a condition for insight at the time he spoke it and it is a condition now. The words are only concepts but they point directly to dhammas, realities. They can and do, even today, lead to the immediate direct experience of realities. If there are not enough supporting conditions then insight at the level of satipatthana cannot yet occur. But by studying the Tipitaka, considering it, applying it and testing it right at the very moment of study, ensures that gradually the necessary supports will develop. If the conditions are fulfilled then insight must arise -no self or God who could stop it. As insight develops we may begin to find the stories of life less interesting. We begin to see below the surface. Past or future mistakes or achievements, no matter big or small, are just icing-bitter or sweet. The shadows, the concepts, are still there but the real interest lies with dhammas, with studying the momentary realities that are arising at the 6 doors. It becomes so natural – one does not have to try so much to have it. No minding about “situation” about being in a special place, doing special things, learning special techniques. Sometimes, it is true, we go off the path, we neglect the study of dhammas or do regrettable things. How could it be otherwise, we have for uncountable aeons accumulated desire, aversion, and ignorance- they are not quickly overcome. Do we have the courage not to overestimate our abilities? Can we, instead of looking at a moment of sati as an achievement, see it as just another dhamma, a conditioned phenomena, not ours? Can we look at moments of calm as merely namas- no more important than any other moment? Can we, instead of hiding our defilements bring them out in the open?-they can teach us who we really are. Can we listen to teachers without projecting qualities onto them? Just listen to them and ever so carefully evaluate what they say: neither assuming it to be right or wrong but as food for consideration. Can we look past his/her reputation, his charisma, his faults, and even his kindness and manifold good qualities, and instead focus on the meaning? Can we, even while he/she is speaking, test his/her words against realities that are appearing now?. At this moment there is seeing. Seeing (a nama) is a vipaka –a result of past kamma, that arises dependent on cakkhu pasada, the sensitive matter in the eye, and visible object, colour, a rupa. Right now is there clear understanding of the different characteristics of seeing and visible object? Or are they still somehow mixed up? It is a long path to really untangle the confusing thing we call life. The more we develop insight ourselves the clearer we are able to judge the words of others. Later dhammas, realities, themselves become our teachers. Robert |
| Peter Tun 26th March |
Vipassana without a teacher is like sailing an uncharted see without a land mark, the north star or a compass. If we happen to be a person who had practised vipassana meditition to a stage of sotapanna(stream enterer) in your past life or if we have practised intensive vipassana meditation to a certain stage(eg. Sankharupekkhanana: Insight into equanimity toward all formations; one of the highest stages o f insight in the classical progression; a subtly balanced mental state that is not disturbed by the alteration of pleasant and painful experience)in this very life, it is quite safe to sail on your own. (You will have the confidence and experience to know when you are on the right route or when y ou have been swept sideways). A good teacher should be able to correct your mistakes pecisely and immediately. We need to have a right frame of mind also. We have to be thankful to those who point us our faults as a learned person who shows the hidden treasures that you are not aware of. Peter Tun |
| Alright Gavin 26th March |
Dear sparklestar, yes i probably used the word 'teach' in the wrong part of my sentence. we need the language of conventional truth (words that imply a self like i, me, you etc) to discuss the ultimate truth of reality. and by stating the interdependent, transient, and empty nature of reality i am necessarily freezing the truth i am attempting to convey. but like you said, bhavana maya panna(wisdom arising from meditation) is the way to know the true essence of reality. my use of the term mumbo-jumbo was to point out what vipassana practice should not be. we both stated that buddha used upaya(skillful means) to transmit the dhamma to the wide audience of north india 2500 years ago, yet he also said that the only way to worship him was by actually practicing the dhamma. certainly what works for some, wont work for others, this is true, but in the context of the discussion(palitha talking about vipassana) it seemed reasonable to point out the emphahsis of vipassana is in experiencing your own truth, the reality pertaining to your own mental-physical structure, and in this way(and thats all) free from the mumbo jumbo of so many religious/spiritual practices today. i hope this better clarifies what i meant with the use of that admittedly vague term. may all beings experience true peace and harmony ibn their lifes. gavin |
| Peter Tun 26th March |
To reflect yourself whether we are on the right tract, we need to focus our attention to the most prominent physical or mental sensation at that moment. If all conditions are balanced, i.e faith and wisdom, concentration and effort, we will be noticing that there are only physical and mental sens ations, without a permanent soul. We will naturally understand how these physical and mental forces interact, i.e the law of cause and effect. We will see either their impermanance or suffering or lack of self-essence. It is like discovering many small ants moving one after another along the ant trail. They come and go, non stop, without our control; even what we have accepted as happiness, on careful meditation will be percieved as suffering because it is prone to disappear, cause attachment and suffering. Peter Tun |
| Thiri Kay Khine 26th March |
Come this retreat in April with sayadaw U Dhammasami it'll be my ninth one in three years.I certainly do not think its possible to do on your own without the guidance of an experienced teacher.In the beginning all the hinderances will come in all shapes and forms at all times. In this electronic age now its possible ask guidance after you have established a good rapport with a teacher.So I say start with one teacher ,one method first.Then meditate under different teachers with the same method.Maybe after that one may try other methods or if become very confident try without a teacher. |
| Tin Htut 27th March |
Dear Dhamma colleague, It is mentioned clearly in the Mahasatipatthana Sutta verse 373 (Nibbana.com) that covetousness and distress will appear if a Yogi is not mindful of the five Khandas. If you have not yet practised any of the four Nupassana and only practised Anapana (Samatha) you may have distress in the form of a fear for illnesses. It is only remedied by the practice of Satipatthana. With Metta Tin Htut |
| POSTED BY | Subject: Samma Ajiva or Right Livelihood |
| Tin Htut 16th March 2000 |
Dear Dhamma Friends, Samma Ajiva or right livelihood in the olden days may be rather limited and can be a practical Sila to follow, but nowadays livelihood has become more sophisticated as weaponry, consumer goods and their trade have been expanded substantially. Basically any livelihood that involves with harming living beings may have to be regarded as a wrong livelihood. Then what about livelihood involving a trade with seemingly harmless items in the past, such as tobacco, amphetamine and related drugs, pyrithrum and other natural pesticides, to mention a few. Tobacco has now become a major health concern and a considerable number of livelihoods will be affected if it's trade is regarded as a wrong way of living. It can cause a wide range of lung diseases as well as ischaemic heart diseases, which are killing millions of people or making them disabled. It's impact on human welfare is far worse than a livelihood involving nuclear weapon or other mass killing weaponry. If one is involved with a wrong livelihood and is also trying to cleanse oneself morally and spiritually, what would be the consequences? Is there any evidence in the literature to support the hypothesis that one can get enlightened despite leading a wrong livelihood. I would appreciate your comments my dear Dhamma friends! With Metta Tin Htut |
| Sparklestar 17th March 2000 |
The world is so complex that it is almost impossible to not inadvertantly be supporting some negative livelihood! Certain companies that seem to produce wholesome products are owned by larger corporations that may engage in weaponry, factories causing pollution, etc. It is almost a full-time job trying to discern who owns who and making wise decisions as a consumer as well as an employee! I think all we can do here is try. And have the right intention. Attention and intention facilitate right view and effort and hopefully in practising this we can make some progress. Very difficult. Sparklestar |
| Tin Htut 17th March 2000 |
It is absolutely right. Any livelihood may one way or another linked with a wrong livelihood in this sophisticated world. However, those who live in developing third world countries (e.g. Burma) may have a greater chance to live a simple live and strive for enlightenment. It might be one of the reasons why it was so difficult to get enlightened in this part of the world, whilst there were quite a few persons who reached a noble status in developing countries. With Metta Tin Htut |
| Sandaruwani Abeysiri. 17th March 2000 |
One who engages in a wrong livelihood cannot attain nibbana - whether directly or indirectly involved in such a wrongful trade. This is because samma ajiva is one of the Noble Eight-fold path. To attain nibbana one must have all these (or it would have been called the noble sixfold path and so on)! Let me clarify the directness and indirectness of such jobs. Livelihoods which should be avoided are those which trade: - weapons/arms - human beings - flesh/ animals bred for slaughter - intoxicants - poisons To sell or promote any such trade is directly engaging in wrong livelihood. To indirectly engage in such is to do accounts for such a firm or to build slaughter houses, or improve machinery for such a business. If your company is however owned by a giant specialising in the above mentioned you are not really involved in wrong livelihood, because you are not promoting their development. If you sell prescription drugs the same applies - because you are not promoting the abuse of drugs and your volition is to cure someone. If your job involves developing drugs to kill viruses it is not really wrong because viruses are not really classified as living organisms. As for worrying about other microbes you must remember to take a middle-path approach (or you would be a Jain), since you have no intention of killing them, but only curing someone it cannot really be a bad karma, - or one would have to constantly live in fear of killing microbes with every movement made and breath taken as our environment is full of them. In conclusion, there is no bending of the rules; So long as you are engaged in wrong livelihood there is no way of attaining nibbana! - unless you give up that job and renounce your lay life. I hope this has solved your problem. with metta Sandaruwani Abeysiri. |
| Peter Khin Tun 17th March 2000 |
To understand Samma Ajiva, the right livelihood, we have to define what is right and what is wrong. Because there are many kinds of beliefs and cultural differences the safest definition would be the livelihood which does not cause harm to ourselves or to the others. Every meaning has different shades and intensity. For example, if you say something is cold, it compares to something hotter. It is all relative until you reach the absolute truth. The law of cause and effect understood by a lay man is different from the one understood by somebody practicing vippasana meditation or those who have seen beyond the absolute truth (i.e. nibbana) at different levels, namely Sotapan, Sakadagam, Anagam and Arahat. For lay man, if you have the five silas, it is good enough to practice meditation. That means we should not be involved in livelihoods which involve direct or intentional killing ( eg. fighting wars, hunting, fishing etc.). We should not take things or possessions of other people, which are not given to us in an accepted reasonable way. ( eg. stealing, taking too much profit: rip-off, avoiding lawfull tax). Our livelihoods should be free of sexual misconducts(eg. prostitution), false speech ( eg. falsifying the price of goods to sell, lawyers who have to mislead or falsify the truth for the client to win), and using and selling intoxicants( eg. alcohol, addictive drugs). This does not mean that we could not meditate if we have done one or more of these misconducts in the past. If you have done bad deeds, the bad results will happen at different times according to the strength of your intentions and efforts. If this bad results coincide with the stage of your progressive insight development, it will deter you to progress to the higher stages of wisdom and can cause delays, which can be years to many life cycles. But every conditioned physical or mental state is impermanent. The good as well as the bad. The results will be impermanent too. That is why it has been said that even the notorious Ajatasattu, who killed his Sotapan father king, after suffering many many lives in the lower or bad hell-like places will one day reappear to understand the ultimate truth 'nibbana'.(He went to take refuge in Buddha, but could not meditate beyond a certain limit.). The best livelihood for enlightenment is to be a Sangha practising vipassana meditation, without stopping until the last state of enlightenment is reached. If somebody is continuously observing the arising and disappearing to the senses, in a non judgemental way, he will be experiencing the true nature of the physical and mental states, namely: anicca, dukkha and anatta. At each and every second of this meditative focussed mental state, it is almost impossible to practice or lead a miccha ajiva, which is too rough and distasteful to the serene meditative mind. May all beings have a chance to lead Samma Ajiva. Peter Khin Tun, Reading. |
| Ven. Kumãra 18 March 2000 |
T.Htut wrote: < Then what about livelihood involving a trade with seemingly harmless items in the past, such as tobacco, amphetamine and related drugs, pyrithrum and other natural pesticides, to mention a few. > I suppose you could group them into the category of "poison". < If one is involved with a wrong livelihood and is also trying to cleanse oneself morally and spiritually, what would be the consequences? Then once would be creating both bad and good kamma. Is there any evidence in the literature to support the hypothesis that one can get enlightened despite leading a wrong livelihood. > None that I've read or heard. However, having got involved with wrong livelihood in this life does not rule out enlightenment in this life; e.g. Ven. Ahimsaka, a.k.a. Angulimala, who give up the wrong way of life and became the Blessed One's disciple. But we have to acknowledge that it would not be easy. The Ven. must have ha d a very powerful store of the right kamma from his past lives. peace Ven. Kumãra Bhikkhu |
| Ven. Kumãra 18 March 2000 |
I thought the *only* person known to have attained Arahatta while being a lay person was the Buddha's father, King Suddhodana. Would like to know the source for the above account of the minister. We should note that none of the above people were engaged in wrong livelihood at the time of spiritual awakening. peace Ven. Kumãra Bhikkhu |
| Maung Lwin 18 March 2000 |
The Minister referred to above was called Santati. (Verse 142, Dhammapada) (full account at http://www.nibbana.com/dmpada2g.htm#santati It must be a very rare occurrence for a lay man to attain Arahatship due to all forms of temptations and distraction and much rarer for the women who may face more hardships. |
| Eng Joo 18 March 2000 |
Hi Bhante, Firstly I hope that you are well, happy and peaceful. I hope your trip to Thailand had been fruitful. The source of the story had been pointed out by MMLwin. Actually I heard the story from Dhamma talks given by 2 different Sayadaws. The first time is from Sayadaw U Dhammika and the second from Sayadaw U Pannananda, both from Panditarama. However there was also another case of a lay person attaining arahantship: The chief Bhikkhuni disciple Khema whom was the chief consort of King Bimbisara. The account of how she attained enlightenment under the skillful guidance of the Buddha is mentioned in the book "Great Disciples of the Buddha." I agree with you that none of those I mentioned were engaged in wrong livelihood at the time of their spiritual achievement. I don't believe that any spiritual achievements of their height is possible without having firstly relinquish their wrongful ways. As Ven. Angulimala himself said: Who once did live in negligence And then is negligent no more, He illuminates the world Like the moon freed from a cloud. Who checks the evil deeds he did By doing wholesome deeds instead, He iluminates the world Like the moon freed from a cloud Metta & with much reverence Eng Joo |
| Tin Htut 18th March 2000 |
There are four modes of birth as far as I can gather. (1) womb born (2) egg born (3) instantaneous rebirth, Upapatika (4) born from moisture etc. I would imagine that microbes and lower life forms will belong to the last category. If I am not wrong creatures who can experience pain and pleasure will only be regarded as sentient beings, and thus killing or harming sentient beings would only be attributable to Panatipata. In other words creatures who reproduce sexually and have some sort of a family may be regarded as sentient beings and any loss of life to these creatures will cause a suffering. Microbes will have to be classified to the same category as sperms and killing them may not be a bad Kamma. However, we cannot cover ourselves with intention or volition context only. One may consider mercy killing to be innocent if volition is the only factor and one would be less thoughtful in advising or carrying out abortions either by using drugs or surgically in the context of helping or saving lives. If selling or producing harmful drugs, chemicals, consumable items, tobacco, weaponry, sex and human trade and animal products are classified as wrong livelihood, then over 90% of livelihoods will be involved. Doctors are also not immune to a wrong livelihood if they use drugs to cure worm and parasitic infestations, to cause abortions, to kill a life etc. despite protecting themselves by the volition context. In conclusion, we must live a very simple life, if not possible to be a Bhikku, if we are really ambitious to become enlightened in this very life, and leading a simple life may not be feasible in this part of the world if you have a family. With Metta Tin Htut |
| Ven. Kumãra 18 March 2000 |
< Firstly I hope that you are well, happy and peaceful. I hope your trip to Thailand had been fruitful. > It's been a very educational trip. Btw, you should have introduced yourself when we happened to meet in Hock Eng's house last month. < However there was also another case of a lay person attaining arahantship: The chief Bhikkhuni disciple Khema whom was the chief consort of King Bimbisara. The account of how she attained enlightenment under the skillful >uidance of the Buddha is mentioned in the book "Great Disciples of the Buddha.> " Ah, yes! I forgot about this one! < lwin@nibbana.com wrote: The Minister referred to above was called Santati. (Verse 142, Dhammapada) > |
| POSTED BY | |
9 March 2000 |
Dear Dhamma Friends, I'd like to impose this controversial question for your opinions. When a sin is committed which has much graver consequences, knowingly or unknowingly? With Metta Tin Htut |
| Gavin 10 March 2000 |
Dear Tin, most definitely- knowingly. Our mental volition(karma) is the most important aspect of our behaviour, more so than physical and vocal. if, through hatred and anger, you plunge a knife into the chest of somebody and they die, this is most certainly bad karma. however a heart surgeon, who commits the same action, yet does so through love and compassion for the person whose life he is trying to save, will have completely different karma (mental voilition). so although the same result has happened, the different karma is what is important here. same with a 'sin', or commiting a negative act against another sentient being. if this is done with intention, through hatred, jealousy or any other such mental impurity, this is surely very bad. however if I unintentionally step on an ant, killing it, well as long as I dont run my foot over it a few times and say 'sucker', then this does not have the same negative karma as does the intentional action. (It should be remembered here that this is according to the Buddhas doctrine on karma. A Jain, however, does not saee this distinction and that is why when you see them in India they will often be wearing face masks and sweeping the gropund on which they are about to walk-for fear of UNintentionally killing any sentient being). But in buddhist terms, an intentional wrong doing has far graver consequences than an unintentional wrong doing. May all beings be happy; Gav x |
| Tin Htut 10 March 2000 |
Dear Gavin, Thanks for the reply. The question put forwarded has been on the issue of a sin that was committed knowingly or unknowingly. It stated clearly that a sin or a bad Kamma has already been committed and therefore volition was involved. Your answer may be of three categories, either much graver or less graver when committed knowingly, or it is the same. There can be different opinions on this issue and I would like to have your view please. With Metta Tin Htut |
| Tin Htut 10 March 2000 |
Dear Dhamma Friends, I would like to clarify on term knowingly or unknowingly. It refers generally to the four Noble Truths and specifically to the consequences of a Kamma. For instance, a Buddhist knows that killing animals is bad, but followers of other faiths may justify such an action as not detrimental if it is done for food, mercy killing or for sacrifice. What would be the consequences if such an action is done with or without knowledge of the Kamma. With Metta Tin Htut |
| Robert Kirkpatrick 10 March 2000 |
An interesting question. I remember one of the commentaries explaining that it may be worse when one does some wrong kamma not knowing that it is wrong. The analogy is someone picking up a hot pot. If we know it is hot we are very careful and pick it up in such a way as to minimize any burning. Whereas someone else may not realize the pot is hot and pick up casually thereby getting burnt. Some people think killing animals is not wrong - they enjoy hunting. For them the wrong kamma is repeated and there are no conditions for giving up these actions. Someone else may be in a situation that makes it difficult to avoid killing - they are very poor, have a family to support etc. But they know that killing has moral implications and are spurred to develop more understanding, do as many good deeds as they can. Eventually their situation may change and they will immediately stop this killing. Ignorance is the deepest and hardest root to pull up. |
| Gavin 11 March 2000 |
Dear Tin, when you say knowingly, do you mean knowing the law of karma, or knowingly doing a wrongdoing against another sentient being? someone might abuse another person, but in their eyes they haven't commited a wrong doing(due to a lack of compassion and unawareness of the law of karma), or someone may abuse another person, knowing their action to be detrimental to the other persons happiness and aware of the karmic consequences (skt. karma phal) of their actions. can you clarify this for me. with metta, gavin x |
| James Tan 11 March 2000 |
There are
three major ingredient on complete karma: 1. The thought and motivation of
doing something; 2. The action itself; 3. The state of mind after the action is
completed. So if thought of something pure or unpure and did not continue in
it. Karma is already committed but ithe full impact of its effect is not
process. This also goes with the state of mind after the act is performed. One
might feel remorseful. James Tan |
| Eng Joo 11 March 2000 |
Hi Dhamma Friends of this list, I have been on this list for a while now and have been silently observing the various discussion that have took place so far. The present discussion originating from the question on difference in consequences of unwholesome action when performed with and without the knowledge of kammic consequences, reminded me of a passage from the Milindapanha I read sometime ago. In that passage King Milinda asked the same question of the Ven. Nagasena. I quote the passage below in the hope that it will help with this discussion. King Milinda said: "Revered Nagasena, for whom is the greater demerit: he who does an evil deed knowingly or he who does an evil deed unknowingly?" "His is the greater demerit, sire, who does an evil deed unknowingly." "Well then, revered sir, do we doubly punish any of our family or our court who does an evil deed unknowingly?" "What do you think about this, sire? If a man should unknowingly take hold of a red-hot ball of iron, glowing with heat, and another should take hold of it knowingly, which would be more severely burnt?" "He who took hold of it unknowingly, revered sir, would be more severely burnt." "Even so, sire, the greater demerit is his who does an evil deed unknowingly." "You are dexterous, revered Nagasena." (Reference to "The Questions of King Milinda. An Abridgement of the Milindapanha" edited by N.K.G. Mendis published by Buddhist Publication Society) It is clear from this passage that the common adage that "Ignorance is bliss" bears no weight in the light of the Buddha Dhamma. Infact ignorance is the fountainhead that propels a being on and on again to seek rebirth in Samsara and to experience again and again its accompanying unsatisfactoriness and insecurity. May all beings work diligently to clear their eyes of the dust of ignorance. Metta, Eng Joo |
| Thiri Kay Khine 11 March 2000 |
First of all I welcome eng joo.welcome eng joo this is from your big ma ma. Once Buddha was asked by his disciple.Which merit is greater the one he does to Buddha or the one Buddha does to him.So Buddha replied the one Buddha does is greater because he knows the concequences of actions better.So shall we apply this to our question at hand? |
| Eng Joo 12 March 2000 |
Thanks Emma for the welcome. Have not seen you for a while. Hope you are well and happy. But if I know you, you will always be your cheerful self : ) Thanks also for sharing the story below. This is the first time I hear about it. Which sutta is it from? It so happen that I was just reading a bookmark infront of me with a passage from the Itivuttaka which reads as follow: "Monks, if beings knew, as I know, the result of giving and sharing, they would not eat without having given nor would the taint of miserliness overcome and stay in their minds. Even if it were their last morsel, their last mouthful, they would not eat without having someone to share it with. But, monks, because beings do not know, as I know, the result of giving and sharing, they eat without having given and the taint of miserliness overcomes and stays in their minds." Well it is said that dana which is perform with wisdom is more meritorious compare to that which is done separate from wisdom. In the story you quoted it is the degree of wisdom present which is in question. Since the Buddha is an Arahat, his wholesome action is incapable of generating more wholesome kamma. Therefore it may not be right to speak of merit in the case of the Buddha's actions. Speaking of giving, VMC is organising a lunch dana next Sunday 19th March at its premises in Bedok. Please come and join us if you can. Bring along your whole family too. Metta, Eng Joo |
| Gavin 12 March 2000 |
Thri Kay, Hi! You said the story about Buddha and merit. Even then if he (the other) isn't as aware as the buddha about the nature of karma, isn't he just as noble for commiting a good action? I mean, if he doesnt know the full 'effects' of karma yet is still behaving in a way as to accumalate merit, isn't this as meritorious as someone who knows the benefit they will receive from giving, say. My point is that you (all of us) don't want people to start doing good deeds just for the merit they are accumalting and for the future fruit of their karma. The six perfections and four sublime states should become spontaneous behaviour and responses (yes, after continued practice, of course), not just rites we perform to accumalte merit. May all beings grow in the dhamma and attain true peace and happiness. Gav x |
| Gavin 12 March 2000 |
Eng Joo, Hi, My name is gavin and I have recently moved to canberra. Yes, you have clarified this point nicely, thankyou. (dana which is performed with wisdom is more meritorious than dana performed without). I have been pleased to discover quite a dhamma community here in canberra, including a local vipassana 'home', where old students get togther to practice on tuesday nights. Great to know the dhamma is alive in canberra. May all beings be happy. Gav x |
| Tin Htut 12 March 2000 |
Dear Dhamma Friends, All of us have replied to the above question unanimously that doing a bad Kamma unknowingly is far graver than doing it knowingly. It shows how well read and well informed are the participants of the discussion group. Without such a knowledge we may incline to consider that doing unknowingly will be less graver. However, if one commits a bad Kamma knowingly, but without paying due regard to its consequences what would be the outcome? Will it still be less graver than doing it unknowingly? For instance, we know that killing animals is not right, but what if we go fishing for sports or for fun? We are doing it unnecessarily just to please ourselves. Will it have a lesser consequence than doing it unknowingly that it is a bad Kamma? One of our group has put forward a question when it was right to kill. The person had a problem with infestation with mice in the kitchen, but was reluctant to use a bait to wipe them off. In such a case I would consider that it would be less graver even if the person had resorted to baiting as the last option. The volition of the offence would be far less than doing it unknowingly. It is mentioned in the texts that killing larger animals such as elephants is far graver than killing insects even if it differs greatly in the number. It is the intensity of the volition that is counted rather than the number, I would imagine. Any suggestions? With Metta Tin Htut |
| Thiri Kay Khine 12 March 2000 |
Yes, Dr Htut, Killing a bunch of mosquitoes would cretainly be far less offence than killing , say ,a cat not to say any larger animal.we have a saying if the Volation is strong the Kamma is effective.You can imagine the difference in efforts ,energy and volition in commiting these acts.Thats why we say good Kamma takes time to manifest whereas the results of bad kamma is very fast. I remember a yogi asking the meditation master how to avoid the bad kamma if she wants to get rid of rats in her house.The Sayadaw told her to warn the rats of the intention to poisin them a few days ahead. |
| Tin Htut 12 March 2000 |
Dear Daw Thiri It's a good advice to lessen bad Kamma when you consider baiting the rats, but how are you going to warn them? Can you think of a universal way of communicating with animals? With Metta Tin Htut |
| Stan Kustesky 12 March 2000 |
Re: Warning the rats ahead of time This is not such a mysterious process. I, too, was told by a very practiced and wise yogi that we can communicate quite successfully with animals, such as rats and ants, by giving them a calm, loving, and kind set of feelings. We explain to them that they, too, have a right to live on this earth, but there are difficulties in sharing the same space with humans. By literally having a brief conversation with them, you alert them that you will have to take steps to ensure a separation of living quarters. I have done this technique with ants that invade our kitchen in the spring; if I do not do this, they increase and multiply, causing all sorts of aggravation. Poisons are expensive and harmful to all of us. So don't even consider them! Animal life forms respond to the same levels of kindness and compassion that humans do. In fact, they may respond without the same questioning and over-demanding reasoning with which we seem to function all the time. In the past I have even made a deal with the ants: I will place a few pieces of old bread, etc. outside where they can retrieve it, and they will not come into my house. It may sound ridiculous, but I assure you that such compassion works. Every so often, of course, a stray ant who has not gotten the word will come in, but I tell him to talk to his friends. The ants do very valuable scavenging work for us humans and they need their own respect for such efforts. Frankly, we can co-exist with all creatures and support one another. We can also get rid of the poisons. There is also no reason to believe that this does not work. It does. It just requires extending metta to all the creatures of the earth, and not just those whom we judge as receptive to such feelings. Sincerely, Stan |
| Tin Htut 13 March 2000 |
Dear Stan, That was exactly what I wanted. When we were asked by a Dhamma colleague how to get rid of mice infestation I have recommended a similar approach, but I did not have a first hand experience and therefore I was not sure if it worked. There are a lot of stories how Metta can influence animals, even much better than using force. I fully support your view and your approach. If we have a pure heart and a genuine kindness these sort of things will surely work. With Metta Tin Htut |
| Eng Joo 13 March 2000 |
We had a lot of rats at our meditation center once. Then the Sayadaw's kappiya ask us to buy rat traps: not the one with the sharp teeth that bite the rats, killing them when they take the bait, but the one where they get caught in a cage. After catching them in the cage: and there were quite a lot of them, the kappiya released them somewhere else. But I guess the best method is that of prevention. We need to ensure cleanliness and orderliness and that left over food are put away properly, etc. This is one way we can protect our sila. Prevention is better than cure they say. Also one Venerable one suggested the method of metta, citing a true example of how a man managed to keep his sila intact when his boss asked him to get rid of a bee-hive that had grown on a tree in the car park of their factory. The man radiated metta to these bees and "pleaded" with them to leave. And somehow the bees really left. Another of my teacher adviced that if there really is no other way except to break the sila, then try to reduce the harm that is done. But in the case of killing I guess we can only try to reduce the defilements involved checking it so that it does not grow, because no matter how much we try to reduce the harm, the being is still killed in the end. And I guess if we really break the precept under such circumstances than we must determine that we will take steps in the future to prevent such circumstances from arising again. And of course life goes on as usual till Nibbana is realised. This is call samsara, the imperfect place : ) Metta, Eng Joo |
| POSTED BY | Subject: Vipassana - Yes; Triple Gem - No |
| Myanmarman 15th February 2000 |
Dear Friends, Vipassana is said to be non-sectarian and suitable for all people regardless of age, sex, race and religion. Many practising European Meditators said they had no intention of changing to a different religion even though they are getting benefits from Vipassana. They have been told that no switch was necessary when they began their Meditation. Most Venerable monks and Theravada Texts affirm that the meditators need to have absolute faith in the Triple Gem (Buddha, Dhamma and Sangha) for any degree of enlightenment. Why do we appear to have given different advice? Why should we have different goals for different people? Should we be more `open' in the beginning? Yours in the Dhamma Myanmarman |
| Jerry Douglas 16th February 2000 |
One can benefit from the dhamma without reaching the final goal in this life. Many start their practice without an intention to reach enlightenment but to gain calmness or blissful feelings. We can teach the Four Noble Truths without anyone taking the refuges. With time they may want to, but it is up to them. Isn't it? Metta, Jerry |
| Robert 16th February 2000 |
Dear Myanmarman, This is an important question. I think we need to discuss exactly what vipassana is: Vipassana is highly developed wisdom that penetrates the true nature of nama and rupa. It is anatta, not self, it arises if there are the correct conditions and can't if there are not. Where does faith in the triple gem come in? It develops along with wisdom. The more one sees the true nature of nama and rupa the greater is ones confidence that what the Buddha taught is entirely true. This type of faith is different from the faith of those who adopt Buddhism because they were taught it by their parents . It is the faith that comes from direct experience. Someone may start to learn about the development of satipatthana and have little faith in Buddhism but if they began to understand realities in the present moment they would gain faith. They would naturally respect the triple gem and give up their old beliefs. Certainly anyone who attains (I mean really attains - not just an imitation )any level of vipassana would have great confidence and understanding of the Buddhas teaching: they could no longer accept any beliefs opposed to it. It might also be useful to discuss what mindfulness is. Some people imagine it to be a type of concentration exercise where they focus on breath, or body, or their movements. But this is merely concentration: Mindfulness,sati, is that reality that is heedful or watchful in the wholesome way. It is not the same as concentrating on an object - which can be either wholesome (kusala) or unwholesome (akusala). For example, a thief may, with great care, gently feel the subtle sensations appearing at his finger tips while he cracks the combination to a safe. In this case there is concentration, but no mindfulness, sati. This example of wrong concentration is easily understood; our difficulty is that wrong concentration can and does come in very subtle shades. And because some aspects of sati appear similar to concentration it is often extremely difficult to know whether the reality that is contacting the object is sati with concentration and thus kusala (wholesome) or merely concentration without sati and thus akusala (unwholesome). Thus developing TRUE vipassana is no easy matter. It takes study, circumspection , investigation, past accumulations ..... There are different kinds and degrees of sati. Considering the impermanence of life in a wise way is done with sati or we may feel genuinely friendly or grateful to someone; at that time a type of sati arises. The type of sati that is associated with the development of vipassana is a direct awareness of a physical reality (in Pali: rupa) or mental reality (nama). This is all from the Buddhist definition of sati. Of course anyone else is permitted to define it in any way they please. But when it applies to the development of vipassana, which is the path that ultimately leads to a complete breakup of the causes that have kept samsara turning for so long, we must define it properly and carefully. Robert |
| Tin Htut 17th February 2000 |
Dear Robert and Jerry, Faith (Saddha) comes under the two headings of the 37 Bodhipakkhiya or the factors leading to enlightenment. It is one of the five faculties of spiritual ( Indriya) and physical (Bo) requisites for enlightenment. Faith is equally important as the other four requisites, which are effort (Viriya), mindfulness (Sati), concentration (Samadhi), and wisdom (Panna). Faith, as you have put it, may not be a taught or accquired faith, but we need to have a faith in the four Noble Truths (Dhamma), in the teacher who taught it (Buddha), and in the Sanghas who preserve it. This is collectively known as the Triple Gem. You may practise Vipassana without faith in the Triple Gem to obtain peace of mind and bliss, but to get substantial progress in wisdom you will need faith. Without the faith in the Triple Gem it is impossible to have any level of insight wisdom, not even the basic levels (Paccaya-pariggaha nana and Samasana nana). These insights are first hand knowledge of the cause and effect pertaining to the right understanding. You may have other features of Samadhi when practised without the faith. If you consider that you have reached the insight wisdom, then you would have faith at least in the Dhamma although you might not acknowledge it. Only Sammasam buddhas and Peccaka buddhas are capable of understanding these wisdom without having faith in the Triple Gem. Other Yogis (lay meditators) need a teacher to understand these Truths and thus, must have a faith in the teacher. Please note that if you learn directly either form a person, or indirectly from books etc. we regard the source as a teacher in Buddhist terms. Those who preach that one does not require a conversion to Buddhism is to lure inquisitive people into the practise of Vipassana. One may start without conversion, but when one becomes progressive one will have developed faith in the Noble Truths. Conversion to Buddhism does not require formalities or rituals, but to acknowledge that you have faith in the Triple Gem, at least in your mind if you do not say it aloud. With Metta Tin Htut |
| Maung Lwin 16th February 2000 |
Dear Dhamma Friends, Thanks to Myanmarman for highlighting this highly controversial situation. And there are wider issues involved. I just wish to mention the one which worries me most. Just assume, all other religions adopt Vipassana but without Triple Gem. The original Vipassana as taught by the Buddha, will be modified to reflect their belief in God and universal Soul. There may be peaceful moments for the non-Buddhist meditators, mentally and physically, in this life from practising Vipassana. It may work to some extent for achieving peace and tranquility and this success though limited may damage the Vipassana Meditation by listing it as a form of mental therapy. Some one may claim that the Christian, Jewish or Muslim modification of Vipassana is better than the ancient original. We do need to monitor this situation and the statistics on post-meditation outcome as well as conversion rates should be studied. I feel that most of these new meditators may not progress, as they are on the wrong track and adhere to their wrong life styles incompatible with the Buddhist Teachings. As a matter of fact it doesn't matter for them as they don't believe in Kamma, our concept of future existences, Samsara, and our final goal, Nibbana. So it may be a waste of time and efforts, if our aim is to help them towards the Buddhist Goal. Just imaging you were born in Jambudipa in Buddha's time,' Will you as a follower of the Buddha say to these people like this? `You just practise Vipassana. You don't need to follow the Buddha. Go back to Purana Kassapa, Makkhali Gosala, Niganta Nataputa, or whoever. There is no need to change your beliefs.' I won't have the guts to say such a thing even now. I trust our Venerable members of the Order of Sangha as they observe monastic rules and do not deviate from the Truth. I believe we must have faith in the Buddha, His Teachings and His Bhikkhus. We can tell them that the time will come when they may develop faith in the Triple Gem and get supramundane benefit as a result, if that is what they are after. The Buddha is against forceful conversion and He does not welcome blind faith. They should be willing to explore what Buddhism can offer and also be flexible and open-minded to new beliefs. Should there be an honest health warning, like, `Vipassana may change your life style and belief'? That way, we can avoid time-wasters, short-sighted beings and concentrate our resources for those who are really serious and ripe for a change. Who knows they could be your old relatives or friends in previous existences. With metta, Maung Lwin |
| Robert 17th February 2000 |
Dear Maung Lwin, Quite right. As you say we should put a warning - Buddhism will change your beliefs and lifestyle. In fact if someone does not change their belief can we say they are doing vipassana? It is actually merely concentration exercises- not vipassana. They may feel more calm and relaxed by this. Great, but to call it vipassana is wrong (it would be laughable except that these wrong ideas are spreading). The stages of vipassana are increasingly deeper levels into the true nature of reality. If one has directly experienced any stage - which means they have ever growing insight into conditions and anatta- how could they still not believe in kamma (for example) or think there was anything permanent such as a soul, or believe that a God controlled anything? I don't see, actually, how anyone could even approach the first stage - nama-rupa parrichedda nana, insight into mind and matter, without a correct understanding of anatta and conditions. The only way to get such understanding is via Buddhist teachings. It is of course possible for one to go to some Buddhist place , meet a good teacher, listen to them and to accumulate theory and direct experience at the same time. Nevertheless this is a very gradual process. I worry that vipassana is being hocked on the market place as a quick fix remedy - something that it could not be. It is rather easy for people to misunderstand and take an imitation for the real thing. People these days are in much hurry for quick results. I personally feel that we should be very up front with the teachings of the Buddha. It should be explained that vipassana can take lifetimes , or even aeons before deep insight is gained. If one is sincere about developing understanding this is not a problem - they are ready to do whatever has to be done, no matter whether results come quickly or slowly. Robert --- |