camerata

I didn't introduce the word "placebo" and I think it is misleading here. We are not talking about something that has "no real effect," we are talking about the mind healing itself.

Well known author John Blofeld was a Buddhist by choice, not by birth. Having been plagued by nightmares all his life he eventually confided in a Tibetan lama. The lama gave him an amulet to put under his pillow and a mantra to recite before going to bed. He never had nightmares again. You can't call that a placebo. This is "religion," but from the Buddhist (doctrinal) perspective it is actually psychology masquerading as Buddhism.

The reason I say it's not Buddhism is that it relies on externals rather than internals, and externals are not reliable. This a theme Ven Payutto develops in the book when comparing Buddhism to other religions.

On 9/29/2016 at 6:37 PM, VincentRJ said:

 

I don't see any evidence for that view. I'm in the process of reading Payutto's talk, and will comment further, later.

 

Whilst it's true that the elite and wealthy have greater access to the benefits of science, just has they have greater access to most things, including expensive meals in luxurious restaurants, lavish holidays, attractive ladies, and private gardens which might be totally natural and have nothing to do with science, the poorest of the poor in a modern democratice society, such as Australia, the U.K, Norway, Sweden, and so on, frequently get the benefits of modern science in the form of life-saving antibiotics, free food and shelter if they are homeless, and/or basic social security or unemployment payments which probably allow them to use the products of modern science and technology, such as a personal iPhone and catch a modern bus if they can't afford a car.

 

Those who are not desperately poor but just have a below-average income, enjoy enormous benefits of science which were not available to the wealthiest of the elite just a few centuries ago.

Those in certain countries who currently live in shocking conditions are probably the victims of religious dogma, as in Syria and Yemen.

 

Exactly what are these benefits of religion that are available to all?

Mental well-being here and now. Ven Payutto's point is that religion tends to offer an immediate solution to problems. Science experiments and tests over a long period just to find one solution to one problem. Look how long it took to find drugs that could combat HIV/AIDS, and then only wealthy nations could afford them. What did science do for people for the millennia before antibiotics were discovered? But read the book, and see where he is going with this. I haven't finished it yet.

3 hours ago, rockyysdt said:

 

Your examples are placebos aren't they?

 

I could just as easily dispense sugar pills and advise they bring liberation.

The point is the effect on the mind is real. You feel good because you feel God/Dhamma is helping you - what does it matter if God/Dhamma is "real" or not?

19 hours ago, rockyysdt said:

 

This goes to the heart of the issue (Religion).

 

Does Religion actually have benefits, or is it merely a ruse, a surrogate/consolation to those who have been economically disenfranchised?

 

The poor and uneducated Thais are a perfect example.

 

The whole country is littered with Wats, places where the poor and the squalid can offer their last 1,000 note in order to buy good luck in their next life.

 

Stripped of any chance of accessing worthwhile education, medical procedures, and a comfortable life, they are offered an ethereal "better next life", a psychological escape from their plight.

 

A benefit or a hoax for the conditioned?

 

We Westerner sceptics are obsessed with the idea that everything has to be scientifically provable or else it isn't "true." It doesn't matter if it is true or not as long as it is efficacious. The benefit of religion (Phra Payutto includes Buddhism in religion whereas I wouldn't) is mental well-being. If I feel good because I gave alms to a monk, it worked. What does a Thai male do after a big trauma in life? He ordains for a couple of weeks. After disrobing he feels refreshed and renewed, probably as if he has atoned too. That it wouldn't work for you or me makes no difference. It works for the believers.

What does science offer? We could take Valium to get a form of mental well-being, but that drugged state sure isn't "true" or "real." Anyway, you'll have to read the book. The PDF file doesn't allow me to copy and paste.

2 hours ago, rockyysdt said:

No one denies the benefit of scientific advances.

Unfortunately, due to the influences of Greed, & Aversion, they are largely enjoyed by only a few.

 

That's exactly what Ven Payutto says: The benefits of science & technology are enjoyed by an elite with the money to afford them. But the benefits of religion are available to all.

I think it is pretty obvious that while the world is getting better in material terms - better healthcare, living conditions, etc - it is getting worse in terms of people's mental well-being. This lack of morals/ethics and mental well-being is the reason Batchelor is trying to come up with a secular, ethical framework based on the Buddha's teachings.

The aims of science and religion are different:

"Religion was born from the desire to escape danger, and science was born from the desire to know nature's truths." But science has led us (perhaps more so in the West) to the idea "that well-being depends on an abundance of material goods."

- P. A. Payutto,  Toward Sustainable Science.

Unfortunately, the Japanese spirit and penchant for extreme endeavour and asceticism often sent them in the wrong direction, such as self-mummification, years of running round Mt Hiei, and teaching samurai how to utilise Buddhist teachings for killing.

The topic is secular Buddhism. We are way off topic here, so any more posts about climate change will be deleted.

As for Batchelor cherry-picking, one academic who claims his previous books did this is quite complimentary about the new one, After Buddhism, which sets out the ideas featured in the talks summarized above:

"I’m happy, then, to report that in his latest and most ambitious work, After Buddhism: Rethinking the Dharma for a Secular Age, Batchelor makes a sustained and serious attempt to argue for his vision of Buddhism, primarily through a theoretically self-conscious, historically informed, and linguistically nuanced analysis of the Pali canon and other early sources. The book is perhaps not quite the work of “systematic theology” Batchelor claims, but it is a careful, honest, and typically eloquent exposition of what he believes and why he believes it."

But he ends by saying:

"More basically, I would argue that while historical research into the beginnings of Buddhism is invaluable, the quest for a “true” Buddha and dharma is probably a misconceived and futile exercise. It is ironic that Batchelor, the great proponent of Buddhist doubt, should be so intent on locating an indubitable, essential Buddha—who turns out to be just the Buddha we moderns need. Cannot Batchelor, and we, live with a Buddha of many faces and voices that change with time, culture, and personal inclination? Cannot we accept a Buddha who does not look or speak like us, and who, in his very difference, challenges our own modern ideological and moral complacencies? To try to live with that Buddha—even as we create a dharma that resounds in our age—might be the most daringly modern move of all."

http://www.lionsroar.com/review-stephen-batchelors-after-buddhism/

There's another review of the book here:

http://secularbuddhism.org/2015/10/01/stephen-batchelors-after-buddism-a-review/

An Anti-Darwinian society would be a pro-Dhamma society.

‘ORIGINAL BUDDHISM’
short course in Early Buddhist Teachings

Presenter: British born monk Pandit Bhikkhu

Saturdays 1-3pm @ Rojana Center, Sukhumvit 23
_______________________________

Overview

You all have ideas about Buddhism; what makes ‘good’ or ‘bad’ monks, what the Buddha would say about the government, materialism, and every other topic.

What the historical Buddha actually taught, might well surprise you.

Well, there was no Youtube 2500 years ago, but there was a fantastically accurate recording system nonetheless, expressed in the ‘sutta’ threads. These are the Early Buddhist Texts – the closest we can come to the actual teachings of the Buddha. They are bewildering and logical, other-worldly and practical, and never quite what you expect.

You don’t have to be Buddhist. Your interest might be academic, might come from scratching your head about Thai culture, or come from meditation experiences. These texts will be presented in an accessible manner. Come for all five weeks, and be informed!

There is a one time 100 baht fee, that covers all five classes (funds to towards a new wireless microphone and video camera so that the events can be properly recorded.)

_______________________________

In This Course

*you will gain a good overview of how the historical Buddha actually taught
*understand how the teachings were recorded
start to distinguish between New Age ideas, and classical Buddhist thinking
*develop a new way of looking at yourself and the world
gain a deeper understanding of Thai culture
*see where later Mahayana Buddhist ideas stemmed from
and much more

All classes are 1-3pm. Come early for refreshments and meet a few of the interesting expats we have in Bangkok!
____________________________________

The Class Schedule

Saturday 1st October
Ariyapariyesana Sutta: one of the Buddha’s own accounts of his personal search and spiritual battle leading to final realization of nibbana.
............
Saturday 8th October
Adittapariyaya Sutta: The Fire Sermon – one of the very earliest teachings given to the ‘fire ascetics’ of India, outlining a key teaching that became the essence of all schools of Buddhism.
............
Saturday 15th October
Double bill – Dvevitakka Sutta and Vitakkasanthana Sutta – these two teachings show the eminently practical side of the Buddha’s teaching, outlining an incisive way to relate to your own thoughts and thinking.
............
Saturday 22nd October
Sakkapanha Sutta – westerners concentrate on practical teachings, but to know Buddhism, you really need to acknowledge the great mythological side of it – this is the Sutta where the Buddha meets God!
............
Saturday 29th October
Mahadukkhakhanda Sutta – pre-modern American culture taught to follow dreams, to strive and struggle for what you want. The Buddha had different ideas on the nature of sense desire. We’ll also embellish with the teaching of the Buddha to Potalia, who fancied himself as a lay-renunciate.

More details at http://www.littlebang.org/original-buddhism-course-in-what-early-buddhism-really-teaches/

On 4/13/2016 at 5:54 AM, hawker9000 said:

It's a two-sided coin. Yes, there's lots of charm to people savoring the moment. There really is. Many in the west could use more of that. But the evil twin is a total lack of thought given to or consideration for the consequences of their decisions and actions on others (actually, even themselves as well). And long-term consequences? Forget it! That, too, can be pretty astonishing to witness...

Yes. I think the kind of "live in the present moment" that Buddhism advocates is to avoid fantasizing about the future and replaying the past, since neither is real and both lead to dukkha. This is very different from a lack of forward-thinking or learning from past experience, both of which result in recklessness and a happy-go-lucky existence.

It's similar in that they both advocate concentrating on our current life, but whereas Batchelor says he has a hard time coming up with any non-metaphysical explanation for rebirth, Buddhadasa had an elaborate teaching about the birth of mental states and the fruit of kamma occurring as mental states.

Bhutan is probably the nearest you'll get to a "real Buddhist country" but it sure is expensive to visit.

On 8/20/2016 at 9:32 PM, gregk0543 said:

It is a great video above. I think that Stephan Batchelors like a climate change denialist when he takes the point of view of Norman who was maybe not an accomplished practisioner against the 99% consensus of the monks who have practised and carried on the tradition in a very serious way indeed.  That is a very poor basis to ignore that the Buddha taught Four Noble Truths.

 

So should we practise science like that? Doubt it.

 

So isnt just Batchelor just an apologist for his own viewpoint and not really trying to understand the Buddhas viewpoint.

To be fair to Batchelor, he's been a serious - if agnostic - Buddhist half his life, he's been a Gelugpa monk, a Son monk, and he still leads Son retreats. As mentioned earlier in the thread, he's trying to provide an ethical framework based on the Buddha's teachings for those practising secular mindfulness meditation, who are simply not interested in anything metaphysical.

This is why he bases some of his ideas on what secular scholars say rather than on what monks say. But in creating a whole raft of teachings from the work of relatively obscure scholars (I wonder if their work has been peer-reviewed and accepted by other scholars?), he is acting like a conspiracy theorist in looking for research that confirms his own notions and ignoring anything that doesn't.

On 7/20/2016 at 0:00 PM, camerata said:

The Buddha's clan, he maintains, were fire-worshipers, hence the many sun and fire metaphors in the early texts ("early" is not defined exactly).

Here is a definition of "early Buddhist texts" from Bhikkhu Sujato:

Early Buddhist Texts:
Texts spoken by the historical Buddha and his contemporary disciples. These are the bulk of the Suttas in the main four
Pali Nikāyas and parallel Āgama literature in Chinese, Tibetan, Sanskrit, and other Indian dialects; the pātimokkhas and some Vinaya material from the
khandhakas; a small portion of the Khudda Nikāya, consisting of significant parts of the Sutta Nipāta, Udāna, Itivuttaka, Dhammapada, and Thera- and Therī Gāthā. The “Suttas” in a narrow sense are those passages that are directly attributed to the Buddha himself (and to a lesser extent his direct disciples).

Non-EBTs:
Abhidhamma, Mahāyāna Sūtras, Buddha biographies, historical chronicles, as well as the majority of the Khuddaka Nikāya and the Vinaya Piṭaka. The Jātakas are non-EBT but derive from stories that in some cases may even be earlier than the Buddha. Commentaries and other late texts may contain some genuine historical information alongside much later invention.

Ultimately, what is important, IMO, is not whether the teachings are 100% verbatim but whether they are "fit for purpose" or not. In other words, "You have to put things to the test in your own thoughts, words, and deeds, to see what actually leads to suffering and what leads to its end."

On 9/5/2016 at 5:12 PM, VincentRJ said:

 

The issue is not necessarily about lying, but about the natural and understandable changes in interpretation that takes place over long periods of time.

 

I hesitate to undermine anyone's belief system, but the fact that we are no longer speaking the same dialect that the Buddha spoke 2,500 years ago, is very likely to be the cause of some distortion in our English understanding.

 

Rigorous rules regarding chanting practices, and continual monitoring to ensure mistakes are not made, might be effective and reliable for a certain period of time.

However, a major principle of Buddhism is that nothing is permanent. Change is unavoidable.

 

During the 4 to 5 hundred years of memorisation and chanting, prior to the writing of the Pali Canon, there was a gradual change in the spoken language. Pali is not the written script of the dialect spoken by Gautam Buddha. It might be similar, but it is not the same. Pali was not even a spoken language, but a literary language. It seems reasonable to me that lots of interpretations were made during the transformation from a spoken language to a written language.

 

Pali is best described as a liturgical language, created to standardize the Buddha's teachings since he encouraged his monks to teach in their own various dialects. It was a spoken language, with no script of its own, and has therefore been written down in Sanskrit and other scripts - including Thai and Roman characters.

"Pali is closely related to the language spoken by the historical Buddha, and
there are hardly any indications of linguistic differences between the two
that might affect the meaning of the texts."

"...the differences in language between
Pali and the historically datable language of the Asokan pillars are no more
than minor phonetic changes that rarely, if ever, affect the meaning of the
content. In all probability a similarly close relationship obtains between
Pali and the historical Buddha’s own dialect."

"For several hundred years, from the time that separate transmission

lineages emerged in the Asokan period until the texts were written down, the
early Buddhist texts were passed down orally in separate textual lineages. Comparative
studies have shown that this oral transmission was highly reliable and that
the core doctrinal material was essentially unchanged. How did this work,
given what we know about the unreliability of memory? Indian culture
provided the template for highly reliable oral preservation. It is known
that the Ṛg Veda and other Vedic texts were transmitted orally - that is,
by memory - with extreme accuracy for over two thousand years."

There were in fact numerous techniques for ensuring the texts were transmitted accurately, including repetition and the standardization of words, phrases and passages.

See The Authenticity of the Early Buddhist Texts by Sujato and Brahmali.

I've always wondered about the ascetic practices of traditional Japanese Buddhism, which seemed to be more about "Japanese spirit" than Buddhism, but here is the experience of a Westerner.

A Small Price to Pay for a Different Kind of Life

On the third day of this training, as I was about to pour the water over myself, I had an epiphany. It hit me with crystal clarity. I was faced with a trichotomy; the future forked into three branches. I could spend the next ninety-seven days in a state of high concentration all my waking hours, spend them in abject misery, or give up and fail to complete my commitment. The choice was obvious.

When I completed the hundred-day training, it was the spring of a new year, and I had a new self. I had entered the crucible (or should I say cryostat?) of the traditional Shingon training and had come out a different person. From that time on, I was able to consciously experience the taste of high concentration whenever I wanted to. One hundred days subtracted from my life were really a very small price to pay in order to live a totally different kind of life.

Full story: Lion's Roar

My guess is it's a misunderstanding. The Forest Tradition is known for  practising mindfulness in everyday activities - perhaps someone thought that meant non-stop meditation.

I've been to Wat Tham Mangkon Thong in Kanchanaburi several times but never seen the floating nuns. They are advertised like a tourist attraction. Otherwise  the temple itself is very quiet.

Earlier in the article it mentions that  "at some of Thailand’s tens of thousands of Buddhist temples, it is common to find monks reflecting while seated before a rotting corpse." Er, really? All I've ever read about this practice is that some monks go to mortuaries to meditate.

Corpses, Pythons, Sleep Deprivation: Meditation Rituals in Thailand Can Be Intense

"The abbots who run Thailand’s temples, or wats, have tremendous leeway in adopting innovative approaches to meditation, and certain practices may be limited to a single sanctuary.

At one temple in Nong Bua Lamphu Province, a monk meditates in what appears to be hot oil. At another temple, Wat Tham Mangkon Thong, nuns meditate while floating in a pool. At Wat Pai Civilsai, meditation has taken place in a box with pythons. Monks also meditate in caves and coffins, where the absolute darkness enhances concentration.

So-called forest monks who observe strict ascetic practices known as dhutanga are said to meditate while walking for weeks without ever lying down, even to sleep.

It is not only monks who meditate in ways that may seem extreme.

Julia Cassaniti, an anthropology professor at Washington State University, was walking in the woods of a Thai monastery when she heard screams coming from a hut. The laypeople inside were using meditation to interact with their past lives, a struggle that adherents describe as painful."

Source: New York Times

Who knew?

In Session 8 - Secular Buddhism - Batchelor talks about monastics and the laity, pointing out that the Canon mentions the "21 eminent lay disciples" who attained stream entry while continuing their jobs as merchants, bankers, etc. He says that in the Sanskrit account of the Buddha's vacillation (over whether to teach the Dhamma or not) after enlightenment, he is tempted to leave this world by Mara rather than invited to teach by Brahma. But his response to Mara's invitation to get on with parinibbana is preserved in the Mahaparinibbana sutta:

Mara: "For the Blessed One, O Lord, spoke these words to me: 'I shall not come to my final passing away, Evil One, until my bhikkhus and bhikkhunis, laymen and laywomen, have come to be true disciples — wise, well disciplined, apt and learned, preservers of the Dhamma, living according to the Dhamma, abiding by the appropriate conduct, and having learned the Master's word, are able to expound it, preach it, proclaim it, establish it, reveal it, explain it in detail, and make it clear; until, when adverse opinions arise, they shall be able to refute them thoroughly and well, and to preach this convincing and liberating Dhamma.'

Here the Buddha apparently treats monastics and lay persons, men and women, as equally capable of attaining enlightenment and teaching the Dhamma. Batchelor thinks - and I'm sure we all agree - that the tendency for a revered monastic order supported by a largely ignorant laity came later (more so in Theravada than Mahayana, I think).

He goes on to talk about how this split tends to get bigger in religions as time goes by, and ultimately leads to a reformation, such as Luther's protestant reformation and - according to him - the emergence of Ch'an in China. Priests as mediators between the laity and God or Nibbana gives way to direct mediation.

Me too. The idea of rites and rituals as a fetter for sotapanna always seemed a bit ridiculous to me. For the layman, yes, but not a stream enterer.

In Session 7 - Dwelling, Pathing, Caring - Batchelor talks about dwelling in emptiness and how emptiness relates to the six sense contacts, as per the Sunna Sutta. He says that with Dhamma the word "path" should be a verb, pathing, and that while a path has a direction it is essentially empty (in the sense of "having no resistance") except for what we know in Buddhism as the hindrances.

He goes into caring in more detail. He translates appamada as both carefulness and caring - this being an important word in the Canon:

Just as all the footprints of living beings are surpassed by the footprint of the elephant，and the footprint of the elephant is considered as the mightiest amongst them，just so have all the meritorious qualities care as their foundation，and care is considered as the mightiest of these qualities.

He translates Dhammapada 21 as something like:

Carefulness is the path to the Deathless.

Carelessness is the path to death.

The careful/caring die not.

The careless/uncaring are as if dead already.

And the very last words of the Buddha as:

Tread the path with carefulness.

See also Thanissaro's comments on appamada.

He then goes on to talk about the fetters destroyed upon stream entry, in particular what is often translated as "attachment to rites & rituals." According to him the idea that this means Brahman rituals is a "later sectarian spin," and that it really means "moral rules." In other words, the sotapanna drops any reliance on established rules of morality and instead uses a "situational ethic" to respond to any given situation appropriately, with care, love and wisdom.

As an example of ethical guidance he gives this famous snippet from the Nalaka Sutta:

'As I am, so are these. As are these, so am I.' Drawing the parallel to yourself, neither kill nor get others to kill.

I kind of lost the plot on Session 6 (Clearly Visible Dharma) due to a lot of interruptions, but I recall the point about how the Dhamma should not be "separate from the mind," in other words the practice should be part of life in general rather than separate activities like meditation,etc. Batchelor tells a story of when when he was a Gelugpa monk and a younger monk fed up with walking around the chedi, reading and meditating, asks a master when they will start actually practising. The old monk says, "When you circumambulate the chedi, read the Dharma and meditate properly, you will be practising."