Renunciation - Discussion
Renunciation
This Good Self, modified 12 Years ago at 6/17/12 8:23 AM
Created 12 Years ago at 6/17/12 4:14 AM
Renunciation
Posts: 946 Join Date: 3/9/10 Recent Posts
Give away everything one owns, live in complete isolation, no job, no TV, no photos, no newspaper or phone, no pets, no human contact of any type. Just sit still in a dark room, occasionally going outside to tend a few vegetables to eat and fetch some water.
Buddha said something about this approach not working, but I can't remember the reasoning. To me it seems like it would be the most rapid approach. Anyone remember what he said?
Thanks.
Buddha said something about this approach not working, but I can't remember the reasoning. To me it seems like it would be the most rapid approach. Anyone remember what he said?
Thanks.
M N, modified 12 Years ago at 6/17/12 8:19 AM
Created 12 Years ago at 6/17/12 8:07 AM
RE: Renunciation
Posts: 210 Join Date: 3/3/12 Recent Posts
Don't know but... that's seems to me to be the hardcore monkish approach to the thing.
Something:
-the psycological self needs some kind of sanity on his own for an approach like that to be effective
-you can be easily misleaded by strange experiences and so on without proper guidance
-some tibetan guy said that the mind still get distracted even in a cave; wich means among the other things, that defilements like torpor, desire and so on can get really strong in such conditions
I think it can work, for sure; it also seems obvious to me that an incredible number of things can go wrong... probably the Shanga works better because of the presence of a teacher, and the support of a group of people (association with the wise) doing the same thing and so on...
Something:
-the psycological self needs some kind of sanity on his own for an approach like that to be effective
-you can be easily misleaded by strange experiences and so on without proper guidance
-some tibetan guy said that the mind still get distracted even in a cave; wich means among the other things, that defilements like torpor, desire and so on can get really strong in such conditions
I think it can work, for sure; it also seems obvious to me that an incredible number of things can go wrong... probably the Shanga works better because of the presence of a teacher, and the support of a group of people (association with the wise) doing the same thing and so on...
This Good Self, modified 12 Years ago at 6/17/12 8:21 AM
Created 12 Years ago at 6/17/12 8:21 AM
RE: Renunciation
Posts: 946 Join Date: 3/9/10 Recent Posts
I agree with you Mario. I think there are much more human and natural approaches to life. But if I was really serious about getting enlightened as quickly as possible, I would do this 'quick and dirty' approach and just try to tough out the pain and hope I didn't go insane. As it is, I have no interest in that approach. I'm wondering why people in the Dho don't follow this path. I think Buddha did say something about asceticism.
M N, modified 12 Years ago at 6/17/12 8:39 AM
Created 12 Years ago at 6/17/12 8:39 AM
RE: Renunciation
Posts: 210 Join Date: 3/3/12 Recent Posts
He racomanded many ascetic practices, but condamned ascetism as not the middle way...
Interesting about this are some Ajhan Chah speaches on thudong; he used this kind of approach for many years and then he wondered if just staying in a monastery wouldn't be better, because the conditions of a monastery are clearly more suitable for development.
I think many don't do that because they are not "really" interested in it; many don't because they have responsabilities, and also, because the founder is an Arahat who was successful just by going on retreats and living a lay life with a good teacher and good dhamma friends; also, I think some of them did, but they are not anymore here to tell us... XD
Apart from joking, such an approach is clearly dangerous; it can work, but I really think it's far from being the more straightforward way to go.
I think the quicker way is to travel around the world and looking for a community of monks with good qualities, i.e. enlightened teachers, plenty of guys seriously interested in practice, a good lay support and so on, and then join it until you get it done...
Interesting about this are some Ajhan Chah speaches on thudong; he used this kind of approach for many years and then he wondered if just staying in a monastery wouldn't be better, because the conditions of a monastery are clearly more suitable for development.
I think many don't do that because they are not "really" interested in it; many don't because they have responsabilities, and also, because the founder is an Arahat who was successful just by going on retreats and living a lay life with a good teacher and good dhamma friends; also, I think some of them did, but they are not anymore here to tell us... XD
Apart from joking, such an approach is clearly dangerous; it can work, but I really think it's far from being the more straightforward way to go.
I think the quicker way is to travel around the world and looking for a community of monks with good qualities, i.e. enlightened teachers, plenty of guys seriously interested in practice, a good lay support and so on, and then join it until you get it done...
Thom W, modified 12 Years ago at 6/17/12 9:23 AM
Created 12 Years ago at 6/17/12 9:14 AM
RE: Renunciation
Posts: 63 Join Date: 12/31/10 Recent Posts
The mature approach to awakening is one that includes every aspect of our life.
Models of awakening that do not include our full humanity and the interconnectedness of our existence naturally create denial, shadow and are simply not in accord with the interdependent self-emergent whole that existence is. No depth of awakening / enlightenment will save us from this!
The latest episode of the Buddhist Geeks podcast is a great discussion that is very relevant here...
Another discussion of engaged awakening is in A Path With Heart by Jack Kornfield. Have you heard of this C C C? It's a fantastic overview of the Buddhist path and exploration of the challenge of bringing awakened principles and the wisdom of deep insight into our everyday lives.
On a personal note, it has been from bringing absolutely every aspect of my life into my practice, from family to job to girlfriend to finances, that has been profound fuel for my path, and brought depths of awakening I could never have reached on my own in a cave. I simply would not have had the fuel to go into the pain and most profound patterns and conditioning that I have penetrated through going into self-created suffering with regards to the nitty gritty in life - love relationships, work, family issues. If you approach it in the right way, this is the most profound fuel for enlightenment.
If you can penetrate (see the true nature of) the most challenging of experiences (sensations) then enlightenment proceeds at a cracking pace. Where are the most challenging of experiences? Where our deepest patterns are. Where are our deepest patterns (reactions / karmic tendencies to perpetuate suffering)? Look to family and love relationships.
The renunciate models are outdated. Although most of us need times of renunciation and asceticism (such as retreat time) to really nail some profound insight, the real meat of enlightenment is in how we bring that back to the world.
If you want the faster path, forget the cave, forget the abstinence, forget the forest - bring it ALL into your practice. It is the hard path, and one not so many are fully ready for actually - it demands the most discipline, and the greatest courage.
The ascetic model is the easy one, not the fastest ;-)
Models of awakening that do not include our full humanity and the interconnectedness of our existence naturally create denial, shadow and are simply not in accord with the interdependent self-emergent whole that existence is. No depth of awakening / enlightenment will save us from this!
The latest episode of the Buddhist Geeks podcast is a great discussion that is very relevant here...
Another discussion of engaged awakening is in A Path With Heart by Jack Kornfield. Have you heard of this C C C? It's a fantastic overview of the Buddhist path and exploration of the challenge of bringing awakened principles and the wisdom of deep insight into our everyday lives.
On a personal note, it has been from bringing absolutely every aspect of my life into my practice, from family to job to girlfriend to finances, that has been profound fuel for my path, and brought depths of awakening I could never have reached on my own in a cave. I simply would not have had the fuel to go into the pain and most profound patterns and conditioning that I have penetrated through going into self-created suffering with regards to the nitty gritty in life - love relationships, work, family issues. If you approach it in the right way, this is the most profound fuel for enlightenment.
If you can penetrate (see the true nature of) the most challenging of experiences (sensations) then enlightenment proceeds at a cracking pace. Where are the most challenging of experiences? Where our deepest patterns are. Where are our deepest patterns (reactions / karmic tendencies to perpetuate suffering)? Look to family and love relationships.
The renunciate models are outdated. Although most of us need times of renunciation and asceticism (such as retreat time) to really nail some profound insight, the real meat of enlightenment is in how we bring that back to the world.
If you want the faster path, forget the cave, forget the abstinence, forget the forest - bring it ALL into your practice. It is the hard path, and one not so many are fully ready for actually - it demands the most discipline, and the greatest courage.
The ascetic model is the easy one, not the fastest ;-)
End in Sight, modified 12 Years ago at 6/17/12 11:24 AM
Created 12 Years ago at 6/17/12 11:24 AM
RE: Renunciation
Posts: 1251 Join Date: 7/6/11 Recent PostsC C C:
I agree with you Mario. I think there are much more human and natural approaches to life. But if I was really serious about getting enlightened as quickly as possible, I would do this 'quick and dirty' approach and just try to tough out the pain and hope I didn't go insane. As it is, I have no interest in that approach. I'm wondering why people in the Dho don't follow this path. I think Buddha did say something about asceticism.
'Asceticism' in context of Buddhism generally refers to self-mortification and the like, which the Buddha rejected. 'Renunciation' generally means rejecting the pursuit of all worldly things, which the Buddha constantly endorsed. Funny how, in contemporary cultures, the distinction doesn't appear so clearly anymore...
The early monks were pretty much all about the kind of practice you're describing (go off somewhere secluded, meditate, come back to beg for food or when otherwise necessary).
End in Sight, modified 12 Years ago at 6/17/12 11:57 AM
Created 12 Years ago at 6/17/12 11:57 AM
RE: Renunciation
Posts: 1251 Join Date: 7/6/11 Recent PostsThom W:
The renunciate models are outdated. Although most of us need times of renunciation and asceticism (such as retreat time) to really nail some profound insight, the real meat of enlightenment is in how we bring that back to the world.
When did the renunciate models become outdated in your opinion, and why / how?
(It seems to me that your exact argument could have been made at any time in the entire 2.5 millennia during which Buddhism has existed; so I wonder, what's so special about the modern day, apart from the fact that it's modern and seems to sometimes come with the trans-context cultural presumption that what applied in the past no longer applies?)
Jake , modified 12 Years ago at 6/17/12 2:39 PM
Created 12 Years ago at 6/17/12 2:39 PM
RE: Renunciation
Posts: 695 Join Date: 5/22/10 Recent PostsEnd in Sight:
Thom W:
The renunciate models are outdated. Although most of us need times of renunciation and asceticism (such as retreat time) to really nail some profound insight, the real meat of enlightenment is in how we bring that back to the world.
When did the renunciate models become outdated in your opinion, and why / how?
(It seems to me that your exact argument could have been made at any time in the entire 2.5 millennia during which Buddhism has existed; so I wonder, what's so special about the modern day, apart from the fact that it's modern and seems to sometimes come with the trans-context cultural presumption that what applied in the past no longer applies?)
This is a great question, End. As a matter of historical fact, the Central Asian forms of Buddhism often collated under the umbrella term 'Vajrayana' involve non-renunciate approaches to practice and life which date back well over a thousand years. The initial spreading of Buddhism into Tibet was largely represented by lay masters, and between the 9th and 11th centuries (before the second spreading, when the monastic theocracies came to power) the lineages of tantric and dzogchen practice were mainly transmitted through families of practitioners who lived normal lives while the sutra-based renunciate practices were transmitted through monastic lineages and the two were not particularly blended. During this period and on into modern times in the lineages rooted in this first spreading there were many important female teachers in the line of transmission, while the sects which emerged in the later spreading C. 11th century involve a monastic-tantric synthesis that effectively brought the Vajrayana to one degree or another within the umbrella of renunciate view, practice and lifestyle (including as that approach does, historically speaking if not natively, a rather strict androcentrism and patriarchal bias-- i.e., the ladies are objects to be renounced).
In these earlier Vajrayana lineages, this possibility of different orientations to cultivation is often expressed in the context of three basic approaches: renunciation, transformation, and self-liberation. These three terms refer to different principals of what to do with klesha (anger, pride, lust, ignorance, jealousy). Each principal is implemented with:
1) various (sometimes overlapping) methods of cultivation, and
2) various approaches to everyday life (roles and rules, in other words)
Each principle implicates a View about the nature of human experience and the Nature of Nature and the nature of the relationship between the two. These Views have in each case a conceptual side and an experiential side, the latter of which is the base for employing the methods and lifestyles of each approach.
Moving up the hierarchy from renunciation to self-liberation, the roles and rules are simplified and broadened until in the upper reaches there are no such prescriptions--- farmers, prostitutes, beggars, nobles, and so on are prominent lineage holders in these approaches, as well as monks and nuns and scholars. Moving down the hierarchy, the roles become more limited (monk and nuns, chiefly) and the rules governing conduct proliferate.
From this point of view, renunciate practice aimed at eliminating klesha and renunciate lifestyle aimed at restricting one's role and governing behavior with rules is as useful as it is to the individual who implements this principle at the precise time the implementation is attempted. It's 'outdated' for an individual who can understand and implement one of the 'higher' approaches. There is an understanding that these approaches are all worth experiencing first hand, as conditions within and around the practitioner are constantly changing, and the principle, method and lifestyle that is optimal for the individual in any given moment/day/week/year may well change and change and change again.
Jeff Grove, modified 12 Years ago at 6/17/12 6:04 PM
Created 12 Years ago at 6/17/12 5:28 PM
RE: Renunciation
Posts: 310 Join Date: 8/24/09 Recent PostsC C C:
To me it seems like it would be the most rapid approach.
if the goal is to elimanate suffering what is the point if it only works when your isolated.
Maybe the most rapid approach is to actually investigate this very moment.
Why are you concerned with the most rapid approach?
I ask this because I spent plenty of time thinking
if only I could live a monastic life I could get enlightened
if only i had a teacher .....
if only i could go on retreat ...
if only i could find a better technique ....
sooner or later you realise this is the self sabatoging your practice at every turn
there are reasons for leading a monastic lifestyle but it has nothing to do with it being the most rapid approach,
if you want to reach a very high level of any activity whether an olympic swimmer, profesional football or even learning a trade like a builder, the more time you dedicate to learning the chosen skills the more you refine these skills. Having no job, no TV, no photos, no newspaper or phone, no pets would free you up to dedicate the time but there would be no point if your not investigating this very moment
katy steger,thru11615 with thanks, modified 12 Years ago at 6/17/12 7:55 PM
Created 12 Years ago at 6/17/12 7:55 PM
RE: Renunciation
Posts: 1740 Join Date: 10/1/11 Recent PostsThis Good Self, modified 12 Years ago at 6/17/12 8:25 PM
Created 12 Years ago at 6/17/12 8:07 PM
RE: Renunciation
Posts: 946 Join Date: 3/9/10 Recent Postskaty steger:
As it is, I have no interest in that approach.
Awwww....katy!!! I obviously have an intellectual interest. Just not interested in the doing.
Thanks for everyone's posts. Have read them all.
Overnight I had some new thoughts about renunciation/asceticism. If one pushes oneself into asceticism, there's a high chance of aversion rising to a very high degree.... and that might solidify the ego just as much as the opposite approach (the self-seeking or self-reinforcing approach to life, which I prefer). Aversion is after all a symptom of self-referencing. On the flip side, maybe the really strong emotional and physical pain that asceticism creates would encourage a practitioner to surrender his self into the oblivion, which is the goal anyway isn't it? I think Tolle did it this way. He just said "I can't hack this pain any more", surrendered totally, went to sleep and woke up enlightened.
Why note "cold, angry, bored as hell, poor, lonely" when you can note "pleasure, arousal, comfort, happiness"?
Maybe because "pleasure, arousal, comfort happiness" has no built-in stimulus for surrendering the self.
If a self is forced into extreme emotional and physical pain, with no escape route, you either suicide, go insane, or surrender into the Void and become enlightened. High stakes poker!
[multiple edits]
Jeff Grove, modified 12 Years ago at 6/17/12 9:59 PM
Created 12 Years ago at 6/17/12 9:55 PM
RE: Renunciation
Posts: 310 Join Date: 8/24/09 Recent PostsC C C:
Why note "cold, angry, bored as hell, poor, lonely" when you can note "pleasure, arousal, comfort, happiness"?
when using the noteing technique it is typical to note what arises when it arises. So you may note "pleasure, arousal, comfort, happiness" when it occurs or "cold, angry, bored as hell, poor, lonely" when it occurs.
End in Sight, modified 12 Years ago at 6/19/12 9:06 PM
Created 12 Years ago at 6/19/12 9:06 PM
RE: Renunciation
Posts: 1251 Join Date: 7/6/11 Recent Posts. Jake .:
This is a great question, End. As a matter of historical fact, the Central Asian forms of Buddhism often collated under the umbrella term 'Vajrayana' involve non-renunciate approaches to practice and life which date back well over a thousand years. The initial spreading of Buddhism into Tibet was largely represented by lay masters, and between the 9th and 11th centuries (before the second spreading, when the monastic theocracies came to power) the lineages of tantric and dzogchen practice were mainly transmitted through families of practitioners who lived normal lives while the sutra-based renunciate practices were transmitted through monastic lineages and the two were not particularly blended. During this period and on into modern times in the lineages rooted in this first spreading there were many important female teachers in the line of transmission, while the sects which emerged in the later spreading C. 11th century involve a monastic-tantric synthesis that effectively brought the Vajrayana to one degree or another within the umbrella of renunciate view, practice and lifestyle (including as that approach does, historically speaking if not natively, a rather strict androcentrism and patriarchal bias-- i.e., the ladies are objects to be renounced).
This is very interesting.
(...other interesting stuff...)
From this point of view, renunciate practice aimed at eliminating klesha and renunciate lifestyle aimed at restricting one's role and governing behavior with rules is as useful as it is to the individual who implements this principle at the precise time the implementation is attempted. It's 'outdated' for an individual who can understand and implement one of the 'higher' approaches. There is an understanding that these approaches are all worth experiencing first hand, as conditions within and around the practitioner are constantly changing, and the principle, method and lifestyle that is optimal for the individual in any given moment/day/week/year may well change and change and change again.
Certainly matching the circumstances of one's life to what one thinks will be most beneficial is eminently practical advice.
On a practical level, one reason I asked Thom why he made the claims that he did is that it's hard for me to get past these two beliefs I have:
1) Lots of spiritually-oriented people would benefit immensely from e.g. 12 hours of meditation every day, much more than they would from integrating spiritual practice with daily life.
2) It's hard to figure out how to meditate 12 hours every day if you're not either temporarily or permanently a monastic or leading a monastic-style life.
(Note that "lots of people" does not necessarily mean "everyone" or "almost everyone".I don't have a definite opinion regarding what proportion of spiritually-oriented people a very lengthy formal meditation practice would benefit.)
Thom W, modified 12 Years ago at 6/20/12 11:22 AM
Created 12 Years ago at 6/20/12 11:22 AM
RE: Renunciation
Posts: 63 Join Date: 12/31/10 Recent Posts
Yeh I'm glad you picked me up on that rather unsupported comment. I've got quite a lot of thoughts about this - it deserves a thoughtful answer, so I'm considering it
(D Z) Dhru Val, modified 12 Years ago at 6/20/12 9:57 PM
Created 12 Years ago at 6/20/12 9:50 PM
RE: Renunciation
Posts: 346 Join Date: 9/18/11 Recent PostsC C C:
Give away everything one owns, live in complete isolation, no job, no TV, no photos, no newspaper or phone, no pets, no human contact of any type. Just sit still in a dark room, occasionally going outside to tend a few vegetables to eat and fetch some water.
Buddha said something about this approach not working, but I can't remember the reasoning. To me it seems like it would be the most rapid approach. Anyone remember what he said?
Thanks.
Buddha said something about this approach not working, but I can't remember the reasoning. To me it seems like it would be the most rapid approach. Anyone remember what he said?
Thanks.
What if, after all that, it doesn't work ?
I think that doubt is the main reason, why a lot of people don't.
Also there was a long established aesthetic traditon in India prior to Sid the Buddha. It is still considered culturally honorable for a family to have a child to become an aesthetic.
So I am guessing relative to that time and place, it might have been a far less drastic thing to do with ones life.
Tom Tom, modified 12 Years ago at 6/20/12 11:27 PM
Created 12 Years ago at 6/20/12 11:27 PM
RE: Renunciation
Posts: 466 Join Date: 9/19/09 Recent PostsGive away everything one owns, live in complete isolation, no job, no TV, no photos, no newspaper or phone, no pets, no human contact of any type. Just sit still in a dark room, occasionally going outside to tend a few vegetables to eat and fetch some water.
I think it would have taken ten times as long (maybe even longer, or not at all) had it not been for the vast amount of information on enlightenment that is available on the internet. So I would add to this: in isolation with an internet connection (or at the very least a copy of mctb). This is sort of how the path went for me anyways, a lot of time spent alone, but not out in the mountains in a cave or segregated in some far away place. No in person teacher/master except for a few very brief conversations with people here and there.