My Dhamma Book (also available on Paper): drive.google.com/file/d/1d8VYL5iOi76u1AEmyI7iGpgPP3T5FaNa/view?usp=sharing My Almanac (also available on Paper): drive.google.com/file/d/1VzAw8zHdhOsDDUzPEubTN64qhVmQhZ0m/view?usp=sharing True Dhamma Lecture: ua-cam.com/video/-uoZ3IgtEeQ/v-deo.html Dhamma Hub Discord: discord.gg/AcDwZ78ybn
13:10 The sutta that came to my mind was MN3. Where the Buddha actually praises the monk who chooses to not eat the leftover food from the Buddha and thus has to go hungry. But enduring a short term discomfort, can lead to long term benefit.
Respectfully I would like to say that it's my opinion that this sutta was altered. The Tathagata clearly says that he didn't gain any higher knowledge or abilities from following the path of pain or asceticism, and came to understand that the Middle Way was the correct approach. If one eats the food and has good strength to cultivate the higher practices, then that is definitely better than being weak and distracted by bodily discomfort. Keep in mind that the first thing the Buddha did when he remembered the way of jhana was not to do jhana, but was to eat and regain bodily strength to be able to cultivate jhana. That's why old age and disease are two of the six things that can make it hard to practice. I have studied the suttas for 10s of thousands of hours and contemplated them for much more time than that, as well as studied about their historical development and this helps me to see this type of contradiction. When encountered one should stick with the explanation that is most inline with the most fundamental necessary teaching, which in this case is the Middle Way. The above being said if one cannot get food for some reason or another, then one needs to remain calm and at the appropriate time go in search of food or if possible move to a place where food can be obtained without too much difficulty. Thank you for taking the time to read this. Sadhu, sadhu, sadhu. 🙏
@@9tee2 I think this would be a matter of perspective. From the perspective of severe asceticism, taking some food to regain strength is very wholesome and very necessary, as practice of Jhana in such a weakened state is very difficult. Yet, when you technically _have_ access to more than enough food, the Buddha did praise those who were wiling to take a bit less - as an example those who would finish 5 bites early. Or those who ate food out of pure necessity, as if it was the flesh of their offspring. I think there were a number of those cases in the Suttas where he praised... lets call it "wise asceticism" more than the opposite - especially for those who had trouble with food. That said, the Buddha never made any definitive rule and always said that "those who want" should follow the ascetic practices^^
How are the following statements consistent with each other: 1. the Dhamma is clear or obvious when virtue is sufficiently advanced, 2. many practices outside Buddhism result in virtue but rarely if ever lead to the Dhamma, and 3. the Buddha essentially chanced upon the Dhamma through effortful trial and error (effortful despite probably having already developed virtue) and found Right View amidst the innumerable wrong views? (or am I stating one or more of these things in an incorrect or misleading way?) Is it that conceptual knowledge of the Dhamma is a necessary prerequisite for seeing it, and is sufficient once virtue has been developed (so for someone who already has the conceptual knowledge, it will be obvious and unavoidable once craving is subdued)? But for someone who lacks the conceptual knowledge, it is near impossible to see the Dhamma even if they have developed virtue?
When I say that the Dhamma is easy to see based on virtue, there is an implicit "nowadays" in there. Based on the instructions of another who has understood the Dhamma _and_ sufficient virtue, the Dhamma will readily present itself to be discrened! You also need to know "what to look for" to discern it, which is the role of those instructions
My Dhamma Book (also available on Paper): drive.google.com/file/d/1d8VYL5iOi76u1AEmyI7iGpgPP3T5FaNa/view?usp=sharing
My Almanac (also available on Paper): drive.google.com/file/d/1VzAw8zHdhOsDDUzPEubTN64qhVmQhZ0m/view?usp=sharing
True Dhamma Lecture: ua-cam.com/video/-uoZ3IgtEeQ/v-deo.html
Dhamma Hub Discord: discord.gg/AcDwZ78ybn
Short, clear, straight to the point. Love it ! Thank you
13:10 The sutta that came to my mind was MN3. Where the Buddha actually praises the monk who chooses to not eat the leftover food from the Buddha and thus has to go hungry. But enduring a short term discomfort, can lead to long term benefit.
Thank you!
Respectfully I would like to say that it's my opinion that this sutta was altered. The Tathagata clearly says that he didn't gain any higher knowledge or abilities from following the path of pain or asceticism, and came to understand that the Middle Way was the correct approach. If one eats the food and has good strength to cultivate the higher practices, then that is definitely better than being weak and distracted by bodily discomfort. Keep in mind that the first thing the Buddha did when he remembered the way of jhana was not to do jhana, but was to eat and regain bodily strength to be able to cultivate jhana. That's why old age and disease are two of the six things that can make it hard to practice.
I have studied the suttas for 10s of thousands of hours and contemplated them for much more time than that, as well as studied about their historical development and this helps me to see this type of contradiction. When encountered one should stick with the explanation that is most inline with the most fundamental necessary teaching, which in this case is the Middle Way.
The above being said if one cannot get food for some reason or another, then one needs to remain calm and at the appropriate time go in search of food or if possible move to a place where food can be obtained without too much difficulty.
Thank you for taking the time to read this. Sadhu, sadhu, sadhu. 🙏
@@9tee2 I think this would be a matter of perspective. From the perspective of severe asceticism, taking some food to regain strength is very wholesome and very necessary, as practice of Jhana in such a weakened state is very difficult.
Yet, when you technically _have_ access to more than enough food, the Buddha did praise those who were wiling to take a bit less - as an example those who would finish 5 bites early. Or those who ate food out of pure necessity, as if it was the flesh of their offspring. I think there were a number of those cases in the Suttas where he praised... lets call it "wise asceticism" more than the opposite - especially for those who had trouble with food.
That said, the Buddha never made any definitive rule and always said that "those who want" should follow the ascetic practices^^
Thanks!
How are the following statements consistent with each other: 1. the Dhamma is clear or obvious when virtue is sufficiently advanced, 2. many practices outside Buddhism result in virtue but rarely if ever lead to the Dhamma, and 3. the Buddha essentially chanced upon the Dhamma through effortful trial and error (effortful despite probably having already developed virtue) and found Right View amidst the innumerable wrong views? (or am I stating one or more of these things in an incorrect or misleading way?)
Is it that conceptual knowledge of the Dhamma is a necessary prerequisite for seeing it, and is sufficient once virtue has been developed (so for someone who already has the conceptual knowledge, it will be obvious and unavoidable once craving is subdued)? But for someone who lacks the conceptual knowledge, it is near impossible to see the Dhamma even if they have developed virtue?
When I say that the Dhamma is easy to see based on virtue, there is an implicit "nowadays" in there. Based on the instructions of another who has understood the Dhamma _and_ sufficient virtue, the Dhamma will readily present itself to be discrened! You also need to know "what to look for" to discern it, which is the role of those instructions
Hi! If you don't mind asking, have you experienced any of the Jhanas?
When the business of the household life allows for it, my mind becomes immered in Samadhi, yes