RE: Is all this noting that some buddhist do an original teaching?

Is all this noting that some buddhist do an original teaching? Stickman3 12/13/24 3:12 AM
RE: Is all this noting that some buddhist do an original teaching? Bahiya Baby 12/13/24 4:11 AM
RE: Is all this noting that some buddhist do an original teaching? Bahiya Baby 12/13/24 4:27 AM
RE: Is all this noting that some buddhist do an original teaching? pixelcloud * 12/13/24 4:38 AM
RE: Is all this noting that some buddhist do an original teaching? Martin 12/13/24 10:54 AM
RE: Is all this noting that some buddhist do an original teaching? Geoffrey Gatekeeper of the Gateless Gate 12/13/24 1:38 PM
RE: Is all this noting that some buddhist do an original teaching? Chris M 12/13/24 2:28 PM
RE: Is all this noting that some buddhist do an original teaching? Stickman3 12/13/24 3:43 PM
RE: Is all this noting that some buddhist do an original teaching? Chris M 12/13/24 4:45 PM
RE: Is all this noting that some buddhist do an original teaching? Geoffrey Gatekeeper of the Gateless Gate 12/13/24 4:57 PM
RE: Is all this noting that some buddhist do an original teaching? Stickman3 12/14/24 5:55 AM
RE: Is all this noting that some buddhist do an original teaching? Bahiya Baby 12/14/24 6:54 AM
RE: Is all this noting that some buddhist do an original teaching? Stickman3 12/14/24 3:52 PM
RE: Is all this noting that some buddhist do an original teaching? Stickman3 12/14/24 4:13 PM
RE: Is all this noting that some buddhist do an original teaching? Bahiya Baby 12/14/24 4:55 PM
RE: Is all this noting that some buddhist do an original teaching? Martin 12/14/24 5:18 PM
RE: Is all this noting that some buddhist do an original teaching? Stickman3 12/15/24 5:21 AM
RE: Is all this noting that some buddhist do an original teaching? Chris M 12/15/24 6:33 AM
RE: Is all this noting that some buddhist do an original teaching? Stickman3 12/16/24 3:16 AM
RE: Is all this noting that some buddhist do an original teaching? Adi Vader 12/16/24 4:10 AM
RE: Is all this noting that some buddhist do an original teaching? Bahiya Baby 12/16/24 5:19 AM
RE: Is all this noting that some buddhist do an original teaching? Bahiya Baby 12/16/24 5:17 AM
RE: Is all this noting that some buddhist do an original teaching? Chris M 12/16/24 7:56 AM
RE: Is all this noting that some buddhist do an original teaching? Jim Smith 12/14/24 6:53 AM
RE: Is all this noting that some buddhist do an original teaching? Papa Che Dusko 12/14/24 8:33 AM
RE: Is all this noting that some buddhist do an original teaching? Matt Jon Rousseau 12/14/24 3:04 PM
RE: Is all this noting that some buddhist do an original teaching? pixelcloud * 12/15/24 7:34 AM
RE: Is all this noting that some buddhist do an original teaching? Chris M 12/15/24 10:08 AM
RE: Is all this noting that some buddhist do an original teaching? Martin 12/15/24 12:32 PM
RE: Is all this noting that some buddhist do an original teaching? Geoffrey Gatekeeper of the Gateless Gate 12/15/24 10:54 AM
RE: Is all this noting that some buddhist do an original teaching? Papa Che Dusko 12/15/24 6:12 PM
RE: Is all this noting that some buddhist do an original teaching? pixelcloud * 12/15/24 4:27 PM
RE: Is all this noting that some buddhist do an original teaching? Martin 12/15/24 1:13 PM
RE: Is all this noting that some buddhist do an original teaching? Chris M 12/15/24 3:22 PM
RE: Is all this noting that some buddhist do an original teaching? Chris M 12/15/24 3:03 PM
RE: Is all this noting that some buddhist do an original teaching? pixelcloud * 12/17/24 6:47 AM
RE: Is all this noting that some buddhist do an original teaching? Bahiya Baby 12/17/24 1:36 PM
RE: Is all this noting that some buddhist do an original teaching? pixelcloud * 12/17/24 1:50 PM
RE: Is all this noting that some buddhist do an original teaching? Saavaka Bheka 12/22/24 4:45 PM
RE: Is all this noting that some buddhist do an original teaching? Papa Che Dusko 12/22/24 6:51 PM
RE: Is all this noting that some buddhist do an original teaching? Bahiya Baby 12/22/24 9:00 PM
RE: Is all this noting that some buddhist do an original teaching? Saavaka Bheka 12/23/24 4:34 AM
RE: Is all this noting that some buddhist do an original teaching? Bahiya Baby 12/23/24 5:00 AM
RE: Is all this noting that some buddhist do an original teaching? Saavaka Bheka 12/23/24 7:03 AM
RE: Is all this noting that some buddhist do an original teaching? Adi Vader 12/23/24 7:24 AM
RE: Is all this noting that some buddhist do an original teaching? Papa Che Dusko 12/25/24 12:23 PM
Stickman3, modified 1 Month ago at 12/13/24 3:12 AM
Created 1 Month ago at 12/13/24 3:12 AM

Is all this noting that some buddhist do an original teaching?

Posts: 185 Join Date: 1/15/21 Recent Posts
Is noting an original teaching or later innovation?
If it's not original why do you expect to get enlightened using it?
thumbnail
Bahiya Baby, modified 1 Month ago at 12/13/24 4:11 AM
Created 1 Month ago at 12/13/24 4:11 AM

RE: Is all this noting that some buddhist do an original teaching?

Posts: 936 Join Date: 5/26/23 Recent Posts
People find it a useful way to ease a beginners mind into direct noticing which is often quite difficult when we start practicing. 
thumbnail
Bahiya Baby, modified 1 Month ago at 12/13/24 4:27 AM
Created 1 Month ago at 12/13/24 4:22 AM

RE: Is all this noting that some buddhist do an original teaching?

Posts: 936 Join Date: 5/26/23 Recent Posts
I have seen some arguments made that is has corollaries in certain suttas. One by one as they occured and some others. That's really up to your own investigation. 

​​​​​​​There's much we don't know about what the Buddha was actually teaching while he was alive. The suttas unfortunately are not necessarily a representation of what he was upto but we can assume they get a lot of it right. Well... Why assume when one can investigate for themselves. 
thumbnail
pixelcloud *, modified 1 Month ago at 12/13/24 4:38 AM
Created 1 Month ago at 12/13/24 4:38 AM

RE: Is all this noting that some buddhist do an original teaching?

Posts: 43 Join Date: 10/25/24 Recent Posts
Daniel's Posts Compilation - Mahasi tradition and noting "authenticity".

Daniel's Posts Compilation - Sutta Heads. 
Martin, modified 1 Month ago at 12/13/24 10:54 AM
Created 1 Month ago at 12/13/24 10:54 AM

RE: Is all this noting that some buddhist do an original teaching?

Posts: 1064 Join Date: 4/25/20 Recent Posts
Stickman3

If it's not original why do you expect to get enlightened using it?

You might say the same to everyone in the Mahayana and Vajrayana traditions, but they seem to be doing fine. As Rob Burbea pointed out, we don't insist on discarding anything that Copernicus didn't mention when we do astrophysics, so we might likewise be open to new techniques when it comes to enlightenment.
thumbnail
Geoffrey Gatekeeper of the Gateless Gate, modified 1 Month ago at 12/13/24 1:38 PM
Created 1 Month ago at 12/13/24 1:37 PM

RE: Is all this noting that some buddhist do an original teaching?

Posts: 711 Join Date: 10/30/23 Recent Posts
Even if it is not exactly original, it seems pretty good at building mindfullness, which is very original

https://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/mn/mn.010.nysa.html
thumbnail
Chris M, modified 1 Month ago at 12/13/24 2:28 PM
Created 1 Month ago at 12/13/24 2:28 PM

RE: Is all this noting that some buddhist do an original teaching?

Posts: 5578 Join Date: 1/26/13 Recent Posts
Is noting an original teaching or later innovation?
If it's not original why do you expect to get enlightened using it?

Help me understand - what's the difference? If it helps people and it works, who cares?
Stickman3, modified 1 Month ago at 12/13/24 3:43 PM
Created 1 Month ago at 12/13/24 3:43 PM

RE: Is all this noting that some buddhist do an original teaching?

Posts: 185 Join Date: 1/15/21 Recent Posts
A man on the internet said it doesn't work because it's not original and that's why it doesn't end suffering. I haven't seen anyone who does it end their suffering so I wondered if it might be true.
thumbnail
Chris M, modified 1 Month ago at 12/13/24 4:45 PM
Created 1 Month ago at 12/13/24 4:45 PM

RE: Is all this noting that some buddhist do an original teaching?

Posts: 5578 Join Date: 1/26/13 Recent Posts
A man on the Internet, eh? Is it the same man who says the earth is flat?

​​​​​​​emoticon
thumbnail
Geoffrey Gatekeeper of the Gateless Gate, modified 1 Month ago at 12/13/24 4:57 PM
Created 1 Month ago at 12/13/24 4:57 PM

RE: Is all this noting that some buddhist do an original teaching?

Posts: 711 Join Date: 10/30/23 Recent Posts
No Chris, the I think you're thinking of the geocentric guy
Stickman3, modified 1 Month ago at 12/14/24 5:55 AM
Created 1 Month ago at 12/14/24 5:55 AM

RE: Is all this noting that some buddhist do an original teaching?

Posts: 185 Join Date: 1/15/21 Recent Posts
Well thing is buddhism says it ends suffering, but nobody has ended suffering. They attenuate it, and modify it which is nice, but they don't end it. So either buddhism is wrong or people aren't doing it right. Seems fair to me.
thumbnail
Bahiya Baby, modified 1 Month ago at 12/14/24 6:54 AM
Created 1 Month ago at 12/14/24 6:50 AM

RE: Is all this noting that some buddhist do an original teaching?

Posts: 936 Join Date: 5/26/23 Recent Posts
Often the trick to dealing with doubts like that is to go meet some people who claim to be Arhats, sit with them, talk with them, try out their practices and in time one tends to come across some people who've really done it. You can feel it in your nervous system that they've really done it, you can feel it in the practice advice they give you that they've done what there is to be done. 

It's a lot of trial and error tbh but this approach has worked for me thus far. The path keeps leading me deeper toward less and less suffering and the people who guide me forward seem earnest and forthright when they point to what it is they've attained. 

If you doubt that there are Arhats or that any of this works, well either test it out in practice or don't. It's your life and your truth, go live it. 

​​​​​​​After stream entry Buddhism isn't a matter of faith. The possibility for the end of suffering is understood on a physical level to be a tangible reality. You can feel how it's possible. There's really no doubt about it. 

thumbnail
Jim Smith, modified 1 Month ago at 12/14/24 6:53 AM
Created 1 Month ago at 12/14/24 6:51 AM

RE: Is all this noting that some buddhist do an original teaching?

Posts: 1830 Join Date: 1/17/15 Recent Posts
Stickman3
Is noting an original teaching or later innovation?
If it's not original why do you expect to get enlightened using it?

Regardless of the origin of noting...

People might have found out things the Buddha didn't know or teach.

Just because a teaching is not original to the Buddha doesn't mean it is wrong.

In particular there are some sutras that modern scholars believe have been falsely attributed to the Buddha. The fact that the Buddha didn't teach them doesn't mean they are wrong about what they have to say about meditation and awakening.

There are a lot of different versions of how noting is taught. I think there are some parts of the Pali canon (attributed to the Buddha) that can be considered noting.
Here is a excerpt from the sutra on the four establishmens of mindfulness, the satipatthana sutta:
https://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/mn/mn.010.nysa.html
...
"Experiencing the whole (breath-) body, I shall breathe in," thus he trains himself. "Experiencing the whole (breath-) body, I shall breathe out," thus he trains himself.
...
And further, monks, a monk knows, when he is going, "I am going"; he knows, when he is standing, "I am standing"; he knows, when he is sitting, "I am sitting"; he knows, when he is lying down, "I am lying down"; or just as his body is disposed so he knows it.
...
Herein, monks, a monk when experiencing a pleasant feeling knows, "I experience a pleasant feeling"; when experiencing a painful feeling, he knows, "I experience a painful feeling"; when experiencing a neither-pleasant-nor-painful feeling," he knows, "I experience a neither-pleasant-nor-painful feeling." When experiencing a pleasant worldly feeling, he knows, "I experience a pleasant worldly feeling"; when experiencing a pleasant spiritual feeling, he knows, "I experience a pleasant spiritual feeling"; when experiencing a painful worldly feeling, he knows, "I experience a painful worldly feeling"; when experiencing a painful spiritual feeling, he knows, "I experience a painful spiritual feeling"; when experiencing a neither-pleasant-nor-painful worldly feeling, he knows, "I experience a neither-pleasant-nor-painful worldly feeling"; when experiencing a neither-pleasant-nor-painful spiritual feeling, he knows, "I experience a neither-pleasant-nor-painful spiritual feeling."
...

Herein, monks, when sense-desire is present, a monk knows, "There is sense-desire in me," or when sense-desire is not present, he knows, "There is no sense-desire in me." He knows how the arising of the non-arisen sense-desire comes to be; he knows how the abandoning of the arisen sense-desire comes to be; and he knows how the non-arising in the future of the abandoned sense-desire comes to be.When anger is present, he knows, "There is anger in me," or when anger is not present, he knows, "There is no anger in me." He knows how the arising of the non-arisen anger comes to be; he knows how the abandoning of the arisen anger comes to be; and he knows how the non-arising in the future of the abandoned anger comes to be.When sloth and torpor are present, he knows, "There are sloth and torpor in me," or when sloth and torpor are not present, he knows, "There are no sloth and torpor in me." He knows how the arising of the non-arisen sloth and torpor comes to be; he knows how the abandoning of the arisen sloth and torpor comes to be; and he knows how the non-arising in the future of the abandoned sloth and torpor comes to be.When agitation and remorse are present, he knows, "There are agitation and remorse in me," or when agitation and remorse are not present, he knows, "There are no agitation and remorse in me." He knows how the arising of the non-arisen agitation and remorse comes to be; he knows how the abandoning of the arisen agitation and remorse comes to be; and he knows how the non-arising in the future of the abandoned agitation and remorse comes to be.When doubt is present, he knows, "There is doubt in me," or when doubt is not present, he knows, "There is no doubt in me." He knows how the arising of the non-arisen doubt comes to be; he knows how the abandoning of the arisen doubt comes to be; and he knows how the non-arising in the future of the abandoned doubt comes to be.
...

thumbnail
Papa Che Dusko, modified 1 Month ago at 12/14/24 8:33 AM
Created 1 Month ago at 12/14/24 8:33 AM

RE: Is all this noting that some buddhist do an original teaching?

Posts: 3313 Join Date: 3/1/20 Recent Posts
As far as I see this suffering and the end of suffering is, and always will remain momentary. 

No permanence in this awakening business. If you fall for that belief that it's permanent well emoticon fool's hope. 

These Buddhist practices help train in attention muscle but also insight muscle of seeing how mind creates this uncertain "reality" from the unknown. This conscious knowing seems always behind. This insight is important. The insight into no-self of all experience too is eye opening so to speak. 

This does not mean I became a holy person of absolute virtue and no bad stuff is happening to me. But it does mean that "I" can let go of the hot coal realitevly fast or even "decide" to hold onto it some longer. 

These attainment-practices also help heal the urge of seeking. This obsession with "grass is greener on the other side". There is no other side. Actually I will argue (maybe not) that there is no this side either. emoticon 

Anyway. Off I go to apply some hot gel on my sore shoulders and neck. It does help. For now at least. 
thumbnail
Matt Jon Rousseau, modified 1 Month ago at 12/14/24 3:04 PM
Created 1 Month ago at 12/14/24 3:04 PM

RE: Is all this noting that some buddhist do an original teaching?

Posts: 250 Join Date: 5/1/22 Recent Posts
I'm sure the Buddha was not the first. He just seemed to explain it a little better than others.  At least that's my view
Stickman3, modified 1 Month ago at 12/14/24 3:52 PM
Created 1 Month ago at 12/14/24 3:52 PM

RE: Is all this noting that some buddhist do an original teaching?

Posts: 185 Join Date: 1/15/21 Recent Posts
Bahiya Baby
Often the trick to dealing with doubts like that is to go meet some people who claim to be Arhats, sit with them, talk with them, try out their practices and in time one tends to come across some people who've really done it. You can feel it in your nervous system that they've really done it, you can feel it in the practice advice they give you that they've done what there is to be done. 

It's a lot of trial and error tbh but this approach has worked for me thus far. The path keeps leading me deeper toward less and less suffering and the people who guide me forward seem earnest and forthright when they point to what it is they've attained. 

If you doubt that there are Arhats or that any of this works, well either test it out in practice or don't. It's your life and your truth, go live it. 

​​​​​​​After stream entry Buddhism isn't a matter of faith. The possibility for the end of suffering is understood on a physical level to be a tangible reality. You can feel how it's possible. There's really no doubt about it. 
-------------------------------------------

​I'd want to video diary their lives to spot ill will, poisons and other signs of suffering they're supposed to be free of. With pervasive surveillance that day is coming, soon AI will know who is contaminated with emotional poison and who isn't.
Stickman3, modified 1 Month ago at 12/14/24 4:13 PM
Created 1 Month ago at 12/14/24 4:13 PM

RE: Is all this noting that some buddhist do an original teaching?

Posts: 185 Join Date: 1/15/21 Recent Posts
Bahiya Baby
Often the trick to dealing with doubts like that is to go meet some people who claim to be Arhats, sit with them, talk with them, try out their practices and in time one tends to come across some people who've really done it. You can feel it in your nervous system that they've really done it, you can feel it in the practice advice they give you that they've done what there is to be done. 

It's a lot of trial and error tbh but this approach has worked for me thus far. The path keeps leading me deeper toward less and less suffering and the people who guide me forward seem earnest and forthright when they point to what it is they've attained. 

If you doubt that there are Arhats or that any of this works, well either test it out in practice or don't. It's your life and your truth, go live it. 

​​​​​​​After stream entry Buddhism isn't a matter of faith. The possibility for the end of suffering is understood on a physical level to be a tangible reality. You can feel how it's possible. There's really no doubt about it. 

​---------------
Thought I'd ask an AIme - Could all pervasive electronic surveillance tell us who is really an arhat, and who is merely pretending?

chatGPT - Electronic surveillance, no matter how pervasive, would be ill-equipped to definitively determine who is truly an arhat and who is merely pretending. The concept of an arhat comes from Buddhist tradition, referring to someone who has attained enlightenment and overcome attachment, delusion, and suffering. It is a deeply personal and internal state of being, one that is difficult—if not impossible—to fully capture through external means, especially technology.

me - What are the outward signs of arhatship?

chatGPT - While these outward signs can sometimes be associated with an arhat, it is important to remember that true arhatship is an internal, experiential state of liberation and wisdom that transcends external appearances. These qualities might be observable in someone who has attained this state, but they are not definitive or guaranteed indicators. Ultimately, the essence of an arhat is a profound inner transformation, one that cannot be fully grasped by external observation alone.

me - So an arhat doesn't have any negative emotions at all?
chatGPT - While an arhat no longer experiences "negative emotions" in the same way as unenlightened beings, they are not entirely devoid of emotions. Instead, their emotional responses are purified by wisdom and compassion. They no longer suffer from attachment to those emotions or allow them to control their behavior. In this sense, an arhat has transcended the habitual, ego-driven emotional patterns that typically create suffering, but they still experience and respond to the world with awareness and a deep sense of equanimity.

me - So they get angry, greedy etc?

chatGPT - An arhat does not experience anger, greed, or hatred because they have fully eradicated the mental defilements that give rise to these emotions. Their emotional life is governed by wisdom and compassion, not reactive attachment or aversion. They still experience emotions, but in a purified and non-reactive way. Thus, an arhat does not get angry or greedy in the conventional sense, and their responses to the world are marked by equanimity, compassion, and profound understanding.

me - An arhat does not experience anger, greed, or hatred because they have fully eradicated the mental defilements that give rise to these emotions. Their emotional life is governed by wisdom and compassion, not reactive attachment or aversion. They still experience emotions, but in a purified and non-reactive way. Thus, an arhat does not get angry or greedy in the conventional sense, and their responses to the world are marked by equanimity, compassion, and profound understanding.

me - So they arise but differently, or are gone?
chatGPT - negative emotions such as anger, sorrow, or greed may still arise for an arhat, but they arise in a non-attached and non-reactive manner. The root causes of these emotions—attachment, ego, and ignorance—are eradicated, so these emotions do not cause suffering or disturbance. They are understood as impermanent and do not disturb the arhat's inner peace or equanimity. Thus, while emotions still arise, they no longer create the same turmoil or suffering that they do for ordinary beings. The arhat's experience is one of clarity, compassion, and freedom from attachment to these emotions.

me - The other day you said they don't even arise, let alone differently

chatGPT - Summary:
  • The most definitive answer is that negative emotions do not arise in the first place for an arhat, because the roots of greed, hatred, and delusion have been eradicated. This is the clearest and most widely accepted teaching.
  • Alternatively, if emotions do arise, they are immediately recognized for what they are and do not lead to attachment, reactivity, or suffering. This view might arise in certain practical teachings or meditative contexts, but the crucial point is that these emotions do not disturb the arhat's peace.
Thank you for pointing out the inconsistency, and I hope this clears things up! The experience of an arhat is, indeed, one of complete freedom from negative emotional disturbance, and in that sense, negative emotions simply don't arise as they would for unenlightened beings.

me - Which is it?
chatGPT - I understand the need for clarity here. Let me break it down definitively, with no contradictions this time.
The Definitive Answer:For an arhat, negative emotions do not arise at all.This is the core and most accurate teaching within the Buddhist tradition. When an individual reaches arhatship, they have eradicated the roots of greed, hatred, and ignorance, which are the causes of all negative emotions. Because of this profound realization, the mental conditions that give rise to negative emotions simply no longer exist.
ChatGPT said:ChatGPTme - You still seem ambivalent as to whether they arise or not - what did buddha say?
chatGPT - Based on the Buddha's direct teachings, the most accurate understanding is that negative emotions do not arise for an arhat. They have completely transcended the mental defilements that cause these emotions to manifest in unenlightened beings. Therefore, an arhat's mind remains peaceful and undisturbed, regardless of the external circumstances they face.

me - So they don't arise in a different way, but rather not at all?
chatGPT - The most clear and accurate answer is that negative emotions do not arise at all in an arhat. The causes of such emotions—greed, hatred, and ignorance—have been completely uprooted, so there is no basis for these emotions to arise in the first place.
Thank you for your patience in working through this! I hope this now provides the final clarification.
me - So why did you say that they do arise but differently, what is your source for that?

chatGPT - Why I Previously Mentioned "Arise Differently":
The earlier reference to emotions arising "differently" was a mistake and an inaccurate expression. I must have mixed up the idea of "emotions arising but not disturbing the mind" (a potential description of the way a meditator might handle emotions on the path) with the final state of an arhat.
In the Buddha's description of arahantship, once all defilements are eradicated, negative emotions do not arise at all, let alone in a "differently" transformed way.To Summarize:
  • For an arhat, negative emotions like anger, greed, hatred, and sorrow do not arise at all because they have completely eliminated the causes of these emotions: the three poisons (greed, hatred, and ignorance).
  • The Buddha’s teachings are clear: once an individual attains arahantship, they have transcended all attachments and emotional disturbances, and their mind remains undisturbed and equanimous.
I hope this finally clears up the confusion, and I deeply appreciate your careful attention to detail! The Buddha’s teachings are unequivocal on this point: negative emotions do not arise in the mind of an arhat
******************************************************
clear as mud!
thumbnail
Bahiya Baby, modified 1 Month ago at 12/14/24 4:55 PM
Created 1 Month ago at 12/14/24 4:54 PM

RE: Is all this noting that some buddhist do an original teaching?

Posts: 936 Join Date: 5/26/23 Recent Posts
It's an empirical path. You have to verify things for yourself. The human nervous system is relatively well equipped to sniff out deceit. You sit with people, you do the practice and you see if it leads to a reduction in suffering. Once you get stream entry there is a significant neurological change that is very helpful in coming to a deep understanding about what the Buddha was offering and where these practices lead. 

You either recognize that you are suffering so horrendously that you must wake up or you don't. That kind of recognition is required. When I took up this way I would have taken a 10% reduction in suffering, even that would have been such a profound relief. I wasn't worried about whether or not becoming an arhat somehow made a person perfect or completely eradicated every drop of suffering. I was going to kill myself and I wanted to see if this path helped me avoid that fate. It did and so far I have gotten a lot more than a 10% reduction in suffering. I walk around day to day pretty near to something I would call an end to suffering and it is very apparent that this "end" is something tangible that can be attained.

I don't know where all this is coming from but if you are practicing these doubts and their underlying meta structure should be experienced in awareness that would likely be a useful place to look in practice. 

Chat gpt is not a real human. The suttas are stories. Go talk to some Arhats. Go practice what they teach. 

Or just let it go and live your life. 

You've either recognized the first noble truth and are going to pursue awakening or you're not. 

You're either open to the idea that through the direct intimate experience of suffering there can be found an end to suffering or you're not. 

If you don't believe Buddhism is a living tradition, if you don't believe there are Arhats... 

Then stop wasting your time with Buddhism. If there are no Arhats there is no awakening and no end of suffering... 

Oh well...

​​​​​​​Go do something else. 
Martin, modified 1 Month ago at 12/14/24 5:18 PM
Created 1 Month ago at 12/14/24 5:18 PM

RE: Is all this noting that some buddhist do an original teaching?

Posts: 1064 Join Date: 4/25/20 Recent Posts
Yes. Or, also, try out one of many approaches to Buddhism in which arhats aren't even mentioned. Most Buddhists, including the people you would find at your local chapter of the Insight Meditation Society or your local Zendo, get great benefits from Buddhist meditation, wisdom, and morality without ever considering an end to suffering. 
Stickman3, modified 1 Month ago at 12/15/24 5:21 AM
Created 1 Month ago at 12/15/24 5:21 AM

RE: Is all this noting that some buddhist do an original teaching?

Posts: 185 Join Date: 1/15/21 Recent Posts
Bahiya Baby:
It's an empirical path. You have to verify things for yourself. The human nervous system is relatively well equipped to sniff out deceit. You sit with people, you do the practice and you see if it leads to a reduction in suffering. Once you get stream entry there is a significant neurological change that is very helpful in coming to a deep understanding about what the Buddha was offering and where these practices lead.  You either recognize that you are suffering so horrendously that you must wake up or you don't. That kind of recognition is required. When I took up this way I would have taken a 10% reduction in suffering, even that would have been such a profound relief. I wasn't worried about whether or not becoming an arhat somehow made a person perfect or completely eradicated every drop of suffering. I was going to kill myself and I wanted to see if this path helped me avoid that fate. It did and so far I have gotten a lot more than a 10% reduction in suffering. I walk around day to day pretty near to something I would call an end to suffering and it is very apparent that this "end" is something tangible that can be attained. I don't know where all this is coming from but if you are practicing these doubts and their underlying meta structure should be experienced in awareness that would likely be a useful place to look in practice.  Chat gpt is not a real human. The suttas are stories. Go talk to some Arhats. Go practice what they teach.  Or just let it go and live your life.  You've either recognized the first noble truth and are going to pursue awakening or you're not.  You're either open to the idea that through the direct intimate experience of suffering there can be found an end to suffering or you're not.  If you don't believe Buddhism is a living tradition, if you don't believe there are Arhats...  Then stop wasting your time with Buddhism. If there are no Arhats there is no awakening and no end of suffering...  Oh well... ​​​​​​​Go do something else. 
<br /><br />It's not me that doesn't believe there are arhats, it's the buddhists who say their is no end to suffering, which is wonky for a religion that claims an end to suffering.<br />Either there is or there isn't. If there isn't then that noble truth needs a rewrite.<br />It needs to say there is a temporary end to suffering, or a kind of attenuation of it.<br /><br />OK, well, I'm happy to accept that there are no real arhats in the pragmatic dharma movement. On a positive note, what's the furtherest into attenuation of suffering people have got?<br /><br />One suffering feeling per day, or one per year, or what? Can people pass a whole year without a single cloud in their sky? There are people in other sects who say they haven't had an unhappy feeling for years.
thumbnail
Chris M, modified 1 Month ago at 12/15/24 6:33 AM
Created 1 Month ago at 12/15/24 6:29 AM

RE: Is all this noting that some buddhist do an original teaching?

Posts: 5578 Join Date: 1/26/13 Recent Posts
It's not me that doesn't believe there are arhats, it's the buddhists who say their is no end to suffering, which is wonky for a religion that claims an end to suffering.

​​​​​​​Hahaha!

This seems like an "I'm just gonna make shit up and criticize Buddhism with that and see if anyone bites on it" kind of thread. I think that's often called trolling.
thumbnail
pixelcloud *, modified 1 Month ago at 12/15/24 7:34 AM
Created 1 Month ago at 12/15/24 7:30 AM

RE: Is all this noting that some buddhist do an original teaching?

Posts: 43 Join Date: 10/25/24 Recent Posts
Hm... I don't read it that way. As a clickbaity trolling thing.
It IS kinda weird that there is the claim that there is in end to suffering and then there is Tibetan Buddhism, Zen and the Pragmatic Dharma crowd who all say the Theravadin claims of what Arhatship will do are facts mixed with fiction. 

I mean, the Buddha saying he teaches the end of suffering but then trying to escape the pain before his death by going into Jhana? Seems contradicitory.

Also, if Arhatship would be the whole package to do away with "suffering", why the need for the THREE trainings, and why is Morality the "first and last training"?

So it comes down to defining the meaning of suffering for a given discussion. This has been done time and time again, and, in a way, the basis for Pragmatic Dharma is finding out and defining what is possible through training and what isn't, based on experiment and not dogma, and MCTB2 for example goes into great detail discussing the pros and cons of so many of the models of awakening. Stickman3, read the chapters on models of awakening in MCTB2. It's a funny bunch of ways to look at this, and most have their problems. 

I think that when Tibetan Buddhism, Zen and pretty much all the modern practitioners who claim irreversible centerlessness all say that dissolving the centerpoint is great, ditching the split is the greatest upgrade ever, BUT there is still pain, the first arrow, all your bodymind conditioning, etc., and when even the Buddha Dude himself tried to escape great pain because pain sucks, I think we can pretty savely use that as a guideline as to what to expect from the practice. There will likey still arise a wish to do something about great pain even though there is no center wishing to get away from unplesant sensations. 
Wich, unless having had some apromixations of that in daily live by experiecing non-dual-ish phases of unpleasant life events will likely still seem illogical and paradoxical upon reading. Whaddaya mean, samsara is nirvana? Huh? How is that better? How is that enlightenment? 

Sensations moving through a sense field that is centerless seems to mean that the second arrow, the looping/viscosity around sensations, has been nullified or almost nullified, and that seems to be a vastly better mode of perception, since most people seem to live their lives contracting into high viscosity/ high dynamic resistance modes of perception, wich increases the unpleasant aspects of life greatly. Dukkha as the axle of a wheel having been dirtied and not running smoothly. 

But "suffering less, noticing it more." Having trained your attention to such a high resolution that centerlessness is obvious also means that it's pretty difficult to get away from any manifestation of the sensate unfolding. You get everything in HD. The very HD mode of perception is better, less viscosity, but also -  more HD. Meaning, the first arrow will show up in all its formerly unguessed HD glory, whereas there will be next to no second arrow. Again, samsara is nirvana? Huh? You mean this pain is nirvana AND you still might say it sucks? Huh? 
Has to be trained and experienced, otherwise a mere description would do the trick for the spiritual seeker. 

That's my current reading of what this is unfolding towards. Maybe when the center falls away completely I'll see and phrase it differently. 
thumbnail
Chris M, modified 1 Month ago at 12/15/24 10:08 AM
Created 1 Month ago at 12/15/24 10:08 AM

RE: Is all this noting that some buddhist do an original teaching?

Posts: 5578 Join Date: 1/26/13 Recent Posts
Several people have now done quite a good job of describing the nature of the conundrum of pain and suffering in Buddhism as presented by Stickman3, and some ways to approach its resolution - reading the relevant parts of MCTB2, for example, or exploring the more nuanced version of the difference between pain and suffering in various Buddhist traditions. In the spirit of these explanations, I'm anxious to see what Stickman3 is willing to do to research and address this for themselves.
thumbnail
Geoffrey Gatekeeper of the Gateless Gate, modified 1 Month ago at 12/15/24 10:54 AM
Created 1 Month ago at 12/15/24 10:53 AM

RE: Is all this noting that some buddhist do an original teaching?

Posts: 711 Join Date: 10/30/23 Recent Posts
From ChatGPT


The story of the Buddha encountering Māra and recognizing his deceptions is a well-known episode in Buddhist tradition. It is usually told in the context of the Buddha's awakening under the Bodhi tree, where Māra symbolizes all the inner and outer obstacles to enlightenment.Māra's Attempts to Distract the Buddha Māra, often referred to as the "Tempter" or the "Evil One," represents delusion, desire, and death. When Siddhartha Gautama sat under the Bodhi tree, vowing not to rise until he had attained enlightenment, Māra tried to prevent him through various means:

  1. Assault by Armies: Māra sent his fearsome armies, composed of terrifying demons, to attack Siddhartha. They hurled weapons and unleashed storms, but Siddhartha remained unshaken. His calm and compassionate awareness transformed the weapons into flowers.
  2. Temptation by Māra’s Daughters: Māra sent his three daughters—Tanhā (Craving), Aratī (Discontent), and Rāga (Lust)—to seduce Siddhartha. They danced and used their beauty to try to distract him, but he remained detached, seeing through their illusions.
  3. Self-Doubt: Māra whispered doubts into Siddhartha's mind, questioning his worthiness to attain enlightenment. He challenged Siddhartha, asking, "Who do you think you are to seek such an exalted goal?"
  4. Claiming the Seat of Enlightenment: Māra claimed that the seat under the Bodhi tree rightfully belonged to him. Siddhartha responded by touching the earth (the "Earth Touching Mudrā"), calling the Earth to witness his countless past lives of virtuous actions and resolve.
The Turning Point: Labeling Māra In some versions of the story, Siddhartha achieves a breakthrough by directly recognizing Māra's tactics as manifestations of his own mind—his fears, cravings, and delusions. Instead of being caught in them, he labels them as "Māra" (deceptions or hindrances). By naming Māra, Siddhartha disarms him. This act of mindfulness—acknowledging the presence of hindrances without identifying with them—renders Māra powerless. For example, when doubts arose, Siddhartha observed, "Ah, this is doubt," and did not let it sway him. When temptations appeared, he saw them for what they were: fleeting desires, empty of substance. By seeing through these illusions, Siddhartha remained steadfast in his meditation. Victory and Enlightenment After exhausting all his tricks, Māra admitted defeat. As dawn broke, Siddhartha reached enlightenment, becoming the Buddha, the "Awakened One." Māra continued to appear throughout the Buddha's life, but the Buddha always recognized him, sometimes saying with a smile, "I see you, Māra." This story teaches the power of mindfulness and recognition in overcoming inner and outer challenges. By labeling hindrances and seeing them as impermanent and non-self, we can disarm their power over us and move toward clarity and freedom.
Martin, modified 1 Month ago at 12/15/24 12:32 PM
Created 1 Month ago at 12/15/24 12:32 PM

RE: Is all this noting that some buddhist do an original teaching?

Posts: 1064 Join Date: 4/25/20 Recent Posts
I think there is also some individual variation.

My current understanding is that there are numerous suffering circuits (responses to physical pain, responses to various classes of unpleasant mind events, responses to various bodily and mental desires, etc.). They are all mediated by clinging (this is essentially a truism) but causing the mind to drop clinging (or not to start clinging) in one suffering circuit does not automatically mean that clinging will cease to be active in all suffering circuits. People may consider themselves done when all of the suffering that they find bothersome is gone, and the type of suffering that is bothersome will differ from individual to individual.

I will qualify this by saying that, when the mechanism of suffering has been clearly seen in multiple circuits, it can be generalized, at least to some extent, and I think it would be possible to arrive at a level at which suffering is never noticed in any circuit.

Whether or not it is permanent also might vary by individual. Essentially, awakening/enlightenment is a change in the functioning of the mind. Changes in the functioning of the mind are generally known as learning. Some learning is more permanent than others, what kind of learning fades also varies from person to person. My wife, for example, forgets languages that she has learned, while I basically don't. But my wife remembers visual things, like faces, or buildings forever, while I don't. (She is an artist. I am a translator.) Some people forget how to ride a bicycle. Almost nobody forgets how to count. So I don't find it unreasonable that, that some people, having learned to see how clinging arrises, never forget that, or never forget that for some classes of suffering, and other people might learn it and, with lack of practice, forget it again. 

Here again, I think it would be possible for some people to never forget it. 

Although they are totally different types of learning, for convenience, we might say this is analogous to language learning. Can an adult learner of a foreign language become truly fluent? What do we mean by truly fluent? Already, there are multiple possible answers, but let's say it is being indistinguishable from a native speaker. It depends on the individual. It depends on the type of training they do and the environment they do it in. It also depends on what you start with. It's considerably easier for a native speaker of English to become fluent in French than Japanese. In the same way, certain psychological profiles and backgrounds will make it easier or harder to arrive at certain enlightenment endpoints. Also, once a person is fluent (however we define it) the chances of that being a permanent change also depend on the individual and circumstances. 

In language learning, we don't get hung up on this variability. Nobody says, this technique, or school, or book, or whatever, does not always result in perfect fluency, so it is bullshit. Nobody says, I don't believe in fluency, and people who do are peddling dangerous notions. You don't hear people say, "If you are not aiming for fluency, why do you bother to take the class?" 

This is the model I take when it comes to enlightenment. It is a little loosey-goosey, sure. It doesn't lend itself to scientifically measurable fluency (enlightenment) scores. But it is relaxing, and open-ended, and useful at all levels of learning. You might say it is good in the beginning, good in the middle, and good in the end :-)
thumbnail
pixelcloud *, modified 1 Month ago at 12/15/24 4:27 PM
Created 1 Month ago at 12/15/24 12:52 PM

RE: Is all this noting that some buddhist do an original teaching?

Posts: 43 Join Date: 10/25/24 Recent Posts
Martin, as much as I agree with and like what you wrote, (and to digress even further from the OT ;) ) I would add that most schools of meditation in Buddhism seem to postulate discrete before/after events, irreversible changes. Taking the form of, to use a Ruben Laukkonen metaphor, experience going offline and online again, rebooting. And it is these rebootings that bring changes in perception and meditative ability (wich I think of in terms of bandwidth and detail resolution of sense field representation). The Buddha talked of stream entry as The Breakthrough, there's the 4 path model. the bumis, keshos, satoris and daigo tete in Zen, all talking about changes that are like flipping switches that can't be unflipped. It is the only kind of learning that I know of that takes place that way. You can play piano all your life, you'll never have a cessation and then have irreversible, noticeably increased ability on the instrument. That meditation practice explores the only aspect of human development that seems, for the vast majority of people, have computer game-like features (level completed, now there are upgrades), sets it apart from other learning. Even though we could talk about learning in general as optimizing cost of prediction error, etc, all of wich might also be said about awakening practices. I was different after SE, in a way I wasn't different after psychedelics or any of my skill learning, or heartbreak, or, or, etc. And different again after 2nd path and different again after the third shift, and since then it's been "a grab bag of shifts." All seemingly upgrading granularity of experience/perception at baseline. These shifts just don't seem to happen in other learning processes. 
Martin, modified 1 Month ago at 12/15/24 1:13 PM
Created 1 Month ago at 12/15/24 1:13 PM

RE: Is all this noting that some buddhist do an original teaching?

Posts: 1064 Join Date: 4/25/20 Recent Posts
I would classify those as learning events. Cessations, like various other mental experiences, such as jhanas, nondual experiences, non-self experiences, etc., allow something to be seen and when that is seen, the mind learns what it could never have learned without it. Once learning happens, it may be permanent. From my point of view, that's not unusual.

Keep in mind that the notion of progress by cessation is not, in fact, universal. It's very much a Thervadan thing. Kensho, for example, is not the same as Stream Entry. There is also a whole history of sudden vs. gradual debate in various traditions. 

I know that it is going against the grain to say this, and that many people here might even find it offensive or deluded, but I think the belief that all Buddhist traditions (and for some people, all spiritual traditions) share the same mechanism of enlightenment through discrete paths marked by cessations, is not even weakly supported by the literature. I get that the contrary argument can be made. But after many years of investigation, I believe that the argument is wrong. That is not to say that I don't think that there is a path to enlightenment through cessations and paths. I just don't think that it is characteristic of all reports of enlightenment, in fact, I am certain that it is not. 
thumbnail
Chris M, modified 1 Month ago at 12/15/24 3:03 PM
Created 1 Month ago at 12/15/24 2:52 PM

RE: Is all this noting that some buddhist do an original teaching?

Posts: 5578 Join Date: 1/26/13 Recent Posts
 I was different after SE, in a way I wasn't different after psychedelics or any of my skill learning, or heartbreak, or, or, etc. And different again after 2nd path and different again after the third shift, and since then it's been "a grab bag of shifts." All seemingly upgrading granularity of experience/perception at baseline. These shifts just don't seem to happen in other learning processes. 

Absolutely this! My experience has been that the processes invoked and fostered by a deep, dedicated meditation practice are unlike any other learnings I have encountered. This stuff works on a different level - it is not intellectual in the way it transforms how we experience the world.
thumbnail
Chris M, modified 1 Month ago at 12/15/24 3:22 PM
Created 1 Month ago at 12/15/24 2:59 PM

RE: Is all this noting that some buddhist do an original teaching?

Posts: 5578 Join Date: 1/26/13 Recent Posts
I know that it is going against the grain to say this, and that many people here might even find it offensive or deluded, but I think the belief that all Buddhist traditions (and for some people, all spiritual traditions) share the same mechanism of enlightenment through discrete paths marked by cessations, is not even weakly supported by the literature. I get that the contrary argument can be made. But after many years of investigation, I believe that the argument is wrong. That is not to say that I don't think that there is a path to enlightenment through cessations and paths. I just don't think that it is characteristic of all reports of enlightenment, in fact, I am certain that it is not. 

Martin, I know some very dedicated and experienced Zen practitioners who would happily disagree with you. Their version, when asked about it, that they have had these experiences within their Zen practice but have been warned away from them, told to ignore them, even to avoid them. This includes jhanas, cessations, and other experiences that you are saying are purely Thervadan. One of these people was an early participant on DhO, and went by the screen name "Gozen." Do a search for his commentary. Gozen was as articulate about these things as any Thervadan.

I'm not saying that meditators in the various Buddhist traditions experience exactly the same things. What I propose is the case is that much of what we experience along the path is rooted in our humanness, our anatomy and the nature of our mind. It's therefore likely that much of what happens that appears to differ doesn't differ other than when we view our experience through the lens of... Vajrayana, Pure Land, Zen, Theravada, etc.. At the deepest level awakening is what happens to human beings if they adopt an appropriate method in a dedicated manner. And from talking to many others it sounds to me like the result of all these traditions, Buddhist and non-Buddhist alike, is essentially the same.
thumbnail
Papa Che Dusko, modified 1 Month ago at 12/15/24 6:12 PM
Created 1 Month ago at 12/15/24 6:04 PM

RE: Is all this noting that some buddhist do an original teaching?

Posts: 3313 Join Date: 3/1/20 Recent Posts
Mara is such a bitch! Slap that bitch! Slap! Slap! 
Stickman3, modified 1 Month ago at 12/16/24 3:16 AM
Created 1 Month ago at 12/16/24 3:16 AM

RE: Is all this noting that some buddhist do an original teaching?

Posts: 185 Join Date: 1/15/21 Recent Posts
Chris M
It's not me that doesn't believe there are arhats, it's the buddhists who say their is no end to suffering, which is wonky for a religion that claims an end to suffering.

​​​​​​​Hahaha!

This seems like an "I'm just gonna make shit up and criticize Buddhism with that and see if anyone bites on it" kind of thread. I think that's often called trolling.
--------------------

Ah right, see, I would take trolling as a word for outsider or disbeliever - similar to kaffir, goy, heathen etc., to demark the boundary between members of the sect and non-members.

The split that formed this sect is the writing of a heretical foundational document, MCTB, which many in the buddhist mainstream regard as chiefly made up criticism at variance with original teaching.

Some of the key beliefs of the sect
- innovations in technique not to be found in the words of the founder can lead to partial alleviation of suffering.
- suffering does not end, rather it is attenuated by being experienced in a non-dual or mystical way.
- claims by the mainstream/majority of buddhism that an absolute end of suffering is attainable are mythical and maintained largely for sociocultural purposes, and are a source of suffering themselves.
- the main body of buddhism is regarded as corrupted by mythical and cultural thinking, yet the sect does not seek to reform the mainstream but rather to maintain it's integrity as a breakaway.

Your job is to enforce the sectarian split and reject non-doctrinal opinion in order to further the partial alleviation of suffering, and preserve an important remnant of suffering which is necessary for social cohesion - which in this sect is regarded as compassionate action.
Adi Vader, modified 1 Month ago at 12/16/24 4:10 AM
Created 1 Month ago at 12/16/24 4:10 AM

RE: Is all this noting that some buddhist do an original teaching?

Posts: 405 Join Date: 6/29/20 Recent Posts
Hi Stickman

I have some collected thoughts in and around the topics being talked about. They maynot directly address the point at hand but are perhaps somewhat related. I am not trying to criticize your point of view, I am sharing my own point of view. Maybe it will be useful to some, maybe not.

Typically before stream entry one starts to see the defilements and one starts to get a first hand sense of why they are defilements. Why do they cause the friction that is experienced as Dukkha - fear, misery disgust, desperation, some combination thereof.

So ... much before stream entry, for some people, maybe not for everyone, the nature of the problem starts to become experientially clear. and we emerge from that experience and then we can put a conceptual narrative around that experience. One such conceptual narrative (which is true to the experience) is the list of ten fetters. There may be many people who have an experiential knowledge of the fetters, but they prefer to use convetionally accepted language. Then there are some people who having an experiential knowledge of the fetters make an attempt to use language that is closer to the experience than the conventional language. In that sense let me talk about the fetters of rupa raga and arupa raga.

Raga means passion. To have passion for that which is rupa and that which is arupa is the way these fetters express themselves. But at an even deeper experiential explanatory level it makes a lot of sense to say - the latent innate tendency that we all have to be passionate about that which has rupa and that which is arupa are the two fetters.

Rupa - materiality - specifically sensorial materiality. That thing which permits awareness to be perturbed, that thing which awareness wraps around and takes as an object. So sounds have rupa, body sensations have rupa, visuals have rupa, .... and so do thoughts, feelings, emotions. We can sense thoughts, the mind can take thoughts as an object(s) because thoughts have sensorial materiality. There are cognitive representations of physical phenomena that also have sensorial materiality - for example 'space'. The mind can take space as an object because space has rupa.

Arupa - immateriality - specifically sensorial immateriality. The absence of rupa. The absence of sensorial materiality. Those things that the senses cannot take as an object. For example 'time', or 'honesty', or 'dishonesty', or 'ambition', or 'thievery', or 'Buddhism', or 'pure Buddhism', or true Dharma or false Dharma, or Theravada, or Mahayana, or Christianity, or Early Buddhist Texts, or late Buddhist texts. All of these are highly abstract concepts that somehow magically the mind conjures up .... but cannot take as an object. We as humans believe that we live in the Rupa world, and we kind of do, but we have one leg in the Arupa world ... always. A world that has no sensorial materiality of its own, its components have no sensorial materiality. The absence of sensorial materiality doesnt mean that world or its components doesnt exist. We cannot navigate our lives without fully engaging in the Arupa world.

So when we lose Arupa raga (or Rupa raga) for that matter as a fetter what is the layered explanation - what exactly has been lost/gained?

1. We have complete clarity of what is Rupa and what is Arupa
2. We never experience Raga towards either
3. The latent innate tendency that has been established and practiced - to get passionate about either rupa/arupa  - over and over and over is uprooted - gone! Finito!

Uptil the point that happens what we can do is keep recognizing the Raga and keep dropping the Raga, withdrawing power from it, depriving it of our active participation. Thereby making simple sane choices sans the Raga. Because passion is not a good master or navigator of our choices. Simple rational sanity is a better master or navigator.

All techniques that attempt to establish mindfulness in the four foundations of mindfulness will deliver results. The practice of the Satipatthana is like buying a one way ticket to Nibbana. It doesnt matter whether those techniques come to us in the garb of 'Buddhism' or 'Prag Buddhism' or 'Neo Buddhism' or 'Early Buddhism' ... these are highly abstract ideas and they naturally trigger Arupa Raga within us. When experiencing Arupa Raga - Dump it! dont participate!
thumbnail
Bahiya Baby, modified 1 Month ago at 12/16/24 5:19 AM
Created 1 Month ago at 12/16/24 5:07 AM

RE: Is all this noting that some buddhist do an original teaching?

Posts: 936 Join Date: 5/26/23 Recent Posts
Some of the key beliefs of the sect
- innovations in technique not to be found in the words of the founder can lead to partial alleviation of suffering.
- suffering does not end, rather it is attenuated by being experienced in a non-dual or mystical way.
- claims by the mainstream/majority of buddhism that an absolute end of suffering is attainable are mythical and maintained largely for sociocultural purposes, and are a source of suffering themselves.
- the main body of buddhism is regarded as corrupted by mythical and cultural thinking, yet the sect does not seek to reform the mainstream but rather to maintain it's integrity as a breakaway.

So, categorically none of this is true. 

The practices discussed here, in peoples logs, the practice that you can go read about right now, can all be found in the suttas
Suffering does end and a suprising amount of people here have talked about their lived experience of that. 
Claims by the mainstream of Buddhism that an absolute end of suffering is attainable are true.
The main body of Buddhism is not corrupt and we are not a breakaway sect, we're just a community of meditators with backgrounds in various traditions who hang out together online in order to help each other and provide support.

I got to ask man, is everything ok?  Is there something we can help with? 
thumbnail
Bahiya Baby, modified 1 Month ago at 12/16/24 5:17 AM
Created 1 Month ago at 12/16/24 5:17 AM

RE: Is all this noting that some buddhist do an original teaching?

Posts: 936 Join Date: 5/26/23 Recent Posts
You should probably read this sutta

It's all there, all the practice, the whole thing. 
thumbnail
Chris M, modified 1 Month ago at 12/16/24 7:56 AM
Created 1 Month ago at 12/16/24 7:54 AM

RE: Is all this noting that some buddhist do an original teaching?

Posts: 5578 Join Date: 1/26/13 Recent Posts
The split that formed this sect is the writing of a heretical foundational document, MCTB, which many in the buddhist mainstream regard as chiefly made up criticism at variance with original teaching.

How so? Can you give specific examples? Just what is the "original teaching?" What specifically in MCTB is "made up criticism?" Who and what comprises the Buddhist mainstream?
​​​​​​​
thumbnail
pixelcloud *, modified 1 Month ago at 12/17/24 6:47 AM
Created 1 Month ago at 12/17/24 6:47 AM

RE: Is all this noting that some buddhist do an original teaching?

Posts: 43 Join Date: 10/25/24 Recent Posts
Ok, now it does seem like trolling, even to me. Seems you were right on the money, Chris. 

But the use of words like "heretical", "sect" and especially "social cohesion" makes me think it's just another victim of some variant of neo marxist power structure narratives. As such, really not that interesting, at least to me. Such worldviews are closed systems, seemingly adopted largely for the emotional kick of having shit all figured out by reducing everything to one monolithic answer. A quasi religion, a lot like Scientology (there's an early review of Hubbard's Dianetics book by a teacher of General Semantics that is quite a fun read...) If there would have been some critical thinking ability to begin with, the language virus would not have found a host there. Kinda sad, but seemingly mostly incurable by reasoning. If the perspective is so hemmed in that there isn't even the basic understanding that this show here is all about actually doing the experiment of cultivating high level attention skills yourself, in your own bodymind lab, N=1, and comparing the outcomes with other practitioners and texts, wich is the polar opposite of going to church, that frame does not seem worth the time engaging with. Have fun labeling the pragmatic dharma crowd a sect with leaders engaged in acts towards social cohesion. Let's not go for a nuanced definition of "suffering", because that robs us of the basis for blanket statements. 

"If you’re smart enough, you can always figure out a way that some complex phenomena is related causally to some simpler motivation. But it’s intellectual masturbation, as far as I’m concerned. It’s not the attempt to explain something. It’s the attempt to reduce everything to one simple principle that you can be master of." - Jordan B. Peterson

Even sadder is it's not even your own intelligence that makes you do this, but a frame you found on the internet, that you adopted because it was just too compelling a stance to use as a pedestal for you to look down from. Look at my high heels, look how tall I am... 

How boring. 
thumbnail
Bahiya Baby, modified 1 Month ago at 12/17/24 1:36 PM
Created 1 Month ago at 12/17/24 1:36 PM

RE: Is all this noting that some buddhist do an original teaching?

Posts: 936 Join Date: 5/26/23 Recent Posts
These neo Marxist western Buddhists with their woke Nazi mind virus mentality. You know like really? Look here pal, The entirety of your experience is contained within this moment. You're a bloody hologram and nothing you can say or do will change that. So buck up y'know? Maybe that's something to think about. If you can think, y'know let's assume that you can, because it's not necessarily obvious that is the case. 

​​​​​​​Dude, haha doing an impression via text is sub optimal please do the voice in your head. 
thumbnail
pixelcloud *, modified 1 Month ago at 12/17/24 1:50 PM
Created 1 Month ago at 12/17/24 1:50 PM

RE: Is all this noting that some buddhist do an original teaching?

Posts: 43 Join Date: 10/25/24 Recent Posts
It isn't obvious to me that doing the voice in one's head is the best use of heads as outlined in the mesopotamian creation myths. Yeah, that's a good way of thinking about it. ;)
thumbnail
Saavaka Bheka, modified 1 Month ago at 12/22/24 4:45 PM
Created 1 Month ago at 12/22/24 4:45 PM

RE: Is all this noting that some buddhist do an original teaching?

Posts: 17 Join Date: 12/19/24 Recent Posts
Stickman3
Is noting an original teaching or later innovation?
If it's not original why do you expect to get enlightened using it?

It's not original. Personally I don't use it.
thumbnail
Papa Che Dusko, modified 29 Days ago at 12/22/24 6:51 PM
Created 29 Days ago at 12/22/24 6:51 PM

RE: Is all this noting that some buddhist do an original teaching?

Posts: 3313 Join Date: 3/1/20 Recent Posts
It is original. I was there beside the Buddha when he was teaching it! I do it personally and it is very fruitful! emoticon 
thumbnail
Bahiya Baby, modified 29 Days ago at 12/22/24 9:00 PM
Created 29 Days ago at 12/22/24 8:43 PM

RE: Is all this noting that some buddhist do an original teaching?

Posts: 936 Join Date: 5/26/23 Recent Posts
Is this not noting practice here in this sutta?

I'd actually love to hear what others think here, is this not equivalent to, identical to, noting practice. 
thumbnail
Saavaka Bheka, modified 29 Days ago at 12/23/24 4:34 AM
Created 29 Days ago at 12/23/24 4:34 AM

RE: Is all this noting that some buddhist do an original teaching?

Posts: 17 Join Date: 12/19/24 Recent Posts
No. Those are supports for the practice, a way to help remembering. Sati means to remember, not to observe.
thumbnail
Bahiya Baby, modified 29 Days ago at 12/23/24 5:00 AM
Created 29 Days ago at 12/23/24 4:55 AM

RE: Is all this noting that some buddhist do an original teaching?

Posts: 936 Join Date: 5/26/23 Recent Posts
How is that different from noting? 

How is remembering different from observing?

In your phenomenological experience of practice how does memory and observation differ?

​​​​​​​Can you remember without observation?

Why do you think several translators of the suttas have decided to use the word observe here?
thumbnail
Saavaka Bheka, modified 29 Days ago at 12/23/24 7:03 AM
Created 29 Days ago at 12/23/24 7:03 AM

RE: Is all this noting that some buddhist do an original teaching?

Posts: 17 Join Date: 12/19/24 Recent Posts
Differences on noting: in the context of satipatthana, the sati part is associated to remember the teaching, dependent origination. The patthana part is that a way to help remembering correctly is through attention to what gives sustent to experiences. Noting, as in mental labeling and momentarily focus, fails to broaden the attention.

Differences from observing: Not going to answer.

Phenomenological: I remember the practice, then I apply it.

Remember without observation: Also not going to answer.

Why use this word: Tradition. This word was used in the oldest translations for sati. Is not a bad equivalent, but the intended meaning doesn't come through so explicitly.

​​​​​​

​​​​​
Adi Vader, modified 29 Days ago at 12/23/24 7:24 AM
Created 29 Days ago at 12/23/24 7:24 AM

RE: Is all this noting that some buddhist do an original teaching?

Posts: 405 Join Date: 6/29/20 Recent Posts
Hi Bahiya my thoughts regarding the Mahasi noting method and its fit with the Satipatthana Sutta

The suttas are in general compressions of detailed conversations. They were probably created as a teacher's guide. So their optimal use is when experienced practitioners are teaching other people or are fine tuning their own practice. Basically the suttas assume some degree of meditation competency already in place.

The Mahasi noting system of practice is a complete practice. It starts with the nuts and bolts of the 'how to' of meditation and the same method/approach can be taken forward by very advanced practitioners as well. And yes! The Mahasi noting system is most definitely compatible with the Satipatthana Sutta. Its one feature is that it is geared towards a particular unfolding of the dhammas - the descriptive laws that govern conscious experience. It naturally lends itself to the unfolding sequence of:

1. Sunnata - The construct nature of experience and experiencing
2. Anicca - The unreliable nature of experience and experiencing
3. Dukkha - The friction inherent in experience and experiencing
4. Anatta - The autonomous nature of experience and experiencing

The one problem with the Mahasi noting method is that the exclusive use of momentary concentration or kshanik/khanika samadhi means that it works the best in a retreat like environment with multiple hours of practice per day for extended durations. The good stuff that happens in the end of the PoI map requires something called Appana samadhi - which literally means attainment grade conncentration. So without  the multiple hours per day regime, in the momentary concentration way, most people find it very difficult to reach Appana samadhi. 

Outside of retreat style practice due to the unfolding sequence of the dhammas and the absence of appana samadhi many people find themselves experiencing a whole of Dukkha and very little transformative nana.

An attempt to say that Mahasi noting has nothing to do with the satipatthana sutta is a bit weird and seems amateurish to me.
thumbnail
Papa Che Dusko, modified 27 Days ago at 12/25/24 12:23 PM
Created 27 Days ago at 12/25/24 12:23 PM

RE: Is all this noting that some buddhist do an original teaching?

Posts: 3313 Join Date: 3/1/20 Recent Posts
"An attempt to say that Mahasi noting has nothing to do with the satipatthana sutta is a bit weird and seems amateurish to me."

This agrees with my experience! 

However I will disagree with the multiple hours per day for Noting style! I've meditated for about 5-6 months 2-3 times a day 45-60 minutes and this led to SE cessation. Of course I did meditate before that for 3-4 years using Calm-abiding daily. But had a break in meditation from 2013 to about 2019 between these two methods. 

Breadcrumb