A skillful posting on the traditionalist vs hardcore yogi dichotomy.

Roger that, modified 11 Years ago at 4/12/13 11:52 AM
Created 11 Years ago at 4/12/13 11:44 AM

A skillful posting on the traditionalist vs hardcore yogi dichotomy.

Posts: 10 Join Date: 4/8/13 Recent Posts
On one occasion Ven. Maha Cunda was staying among the Cetis in Sanjatiya. There he addressed the monks, "Friend monks!"

"Yes, friend," the monks responded to him.

Ven. Maha Cunda said, "Friends, there is the case where Dhamma-devotee monks[1] disparage jhana monks, saying, 'These people are absorbed and besorbed in jhana, saying, "We are absorbed, we are absorbed." But why, indeed, are they absorbed? For what purpose are they absorbed? How are they absorbed?' In that, the Dhamma-devotee monks do not shine brightly, and the jhana monks do not shine brightly. That is not practicing for the welfare of the masses, for the happiness of the masses, for the good of the masses, nor for the welfare & happiness of human & divine beings.

"Then there is the case where jhana monks disparage Dhamma-devotee monks, saying, 'These people say, "We are Dhamma-devotees, we are Dhamma-devotees,' but they are excitable, boisterous, unsteady, mouthy, loose in their talk, muddled in their mindfulness, unalert, unconcentrated, their minds wandering, their senses uncontrolled. Why, indeed, are they Dhamma devotees? For what purpose are they Dhamma devotees? How are they Dhamma devotees?' In that, the jhana monks do not shine brightly, and the Dhamma-devotee monks do not shine brightly. That is not practicing for the welfare of the masses, for the happiness of the masses, for the good of the masses, nor for the welfare & happiness of human & divine beings.

"Then there is the case where Dhamma-devotee monks praise only Dhamma-devotee monks, and not jhana monks. In that, the Dhamma-devotee monks do not shine brightly, and the jhana monks do not shine brightly. That is not practicing for the welfare of the masses, for the happiness of the masses, for the good of the masses, nor for the welfare & happiness of human & divine beings.

"Then there is the case where jhana monks praise only jhana monks, and not Dhamma-devotee monks. In that, the jhana monks do not shine brightly, and the Dhamma-devotee monks do not shine brightly. That is not practicing for the welfare of the masses, for the happiness of the masses, for the good of the masses, nor for the welfare & happiness of human & divine beings.

"Thus, friends, you should train yourselves: 'Being Dhamma-devotee monks, we will speak in praise of jhana monks.' That's how you should train yourselves. Why is that? Because these are amazing people, hard to find in the world, i.e., those who dwell touching the deathless element with the body.[2]

"And thus, friends, you should train yourselves: 'Being jhana monks, we will speak in praise of Dhamma-devotee monks.' That's how you should train yourselves. Why is that? Because these are amazing people, hard to find in the world, i.e., those who penetrate with discernment statements of deep meaning."


I thought it was highly relevant.

Sutta Reference
thumbnail
Jake , modified 11 Years ago at 4/12/13 3:09 PM
Created 11 Years ago at 4/12/13 3:09 PM

RE: A skillful posting on the traditionalist vs hardcore yogi dichotomy.

Posts: 695 Join Date: 5/22/10 Recent Posts
jhana monks dwell touching the deathless element with the body.

Dhamma-devotee monks.' penetrate with discernment statements of deep meaning."


That's a nice way to describe two different approaches to practice. I bet lots of folks here with a solid practice can relate to both of these styles to some extent, even if a given practitioner may tend more in one direction than another. In my experience "penetrating with discernment" made it easier to "touch the deathless with the body".

Breadcrumb