Originally posted by Jamber:people tend to have a double standard when it comes to dealing with matters in daily life vs. spiritual life.
in daily life, when i need someone to fix my broken pipes, i would want to consult a person who clearly proclaims himself to be a fully certified plumber and preferably good reference from friends.
in daily life, when i am involved in legal issues, i would want to consult a person who clearly proclaims himself to be a fully certified lawyer and pay good money for his service.
in daily life, when i want to sell my house, i would want to engage a person who clearly proclaims himself to be a fully certified property agent and he obviously gets paid good commission on a successful deal.
in spiritual life, when i want to seek authentic practice:
i am distrustful to go to a teacher if he happens to clearly proclaims himself to be a XXXX (insert preferred spiritual attainment here - Arahant, Bodhisattva, Awakened... etc) - but i will demand to see my doctor's full qualification before allowing him to diagnose my illness.
i expect free-of-charge service from my teacher who will guide me to direct awakening, coz talking about money is a taboo - but i will pay good money to my lawyer for his few "pointing out instructions" to get me out of my legal mess.
i would prefer my teacher to keep his professional practical experience and attainment as vague as possible, coz anything clearer and more direct would be construed as politically-incorrect or worse, lies - but i will demand full disclosure of my child's tuition teacher resume and experience before hiring him.
the hardcore dharma movement is to normalize such disparate double standards in people and bring spiritual practice down from the airy-fairy pedestal and hopefully instill a down-to-earth, can-do and common-place practice attitude in the society, just like any other mundance activities we engage ourselves in.
my half-cent worth.
hello long time no see :)
wow very keen observation!
can this also be a manifestation of subtle ego fears?
Yes, we want to see qualified and certified people to help us do our things - bankers, doctors etc in daily life.
But guess what? It doesn't solve the problem, we get people with fake degrees, fake certifications going around, people still get duped.
And what happens also is, ppl start to say "Oh this teacher is better! This lawyer is better! He's got a degree from oxford! He's a director of whatever! He really cures people!" and everyone flocks to that guy. So ppl realised "hey if i want to be like this guy, and earn big money and name, i better go get a degree from oxford!" and end up when they realise they can't have that degree, they just settle for any degree that is good, and u get lots of not-really-that-brillant people around with a "whatever" degree / certification.
In the worldly things, degree and certifcations helps, but why do people want to get a degree or be certified in the 1st place? It's because society demands these people around to help them do their stuff, and if they don't go get a degree, they can't earn their living.
In the Buddhadharma, even though everyone wants to follow the best teacher, no one is suppose to announce their attainments. To understand why, we have to consider the consequences of these actions.
1) If someone announces he is the real deal, everyone flocks to him to learn. This can induce jealousy and cause division in the community - this is especially serious if it happens in the community of monks and nuns - a schism may follow. Therefore to protect sentient beings, attainments should not be revealed.
2) During the Buddha's time, although the Buddha certified Bhikhus, the people are not like the people in our Dharma ending age. There are less people at that time who anyhow claim they have attain xxxxx attainment.
Now the Buddha is no longer around to give certifications, and as we move into the dharma ending age, demons spread like wildfire, if the ppl who have reach xxxx attainments start to disclose their attainments, so too can these demons claim such and attract followers and mislead people causing them to fall. Therefore to protect sentient beings, attainments should not be revealed.
3) It is easier to discern who's a quack in terms of worldly stuff, that's why we hear people saying "this uni is not so good", "this doctor is good" etc. But in terms of spiritual attainments - who can discern? Unless a person is of a higher spiritual level than that person who claims he is xxxxxx. Therefore, it is easy to make claims with no one knowing whether you have really achieve that state because living beings are confused and deluded. Therefore to protect sentient beings, attainments should not be revealed.
The buddha never indicated a successor to his teachings, and ask the monks to rely on the dharma as their refuge. As such, we can only rely on the what the Buddha taught - the sutras, to see if people are "certified" in a sense - at the very least, we should be able to tell for sure that are certified to be on the wrong path, certified to a wrong attainment with the sutra's explanation.
i think AEN has a point in that such revelation of attainments can actually encourage those who think that meditation and liberation is completely beyond them. maybe AEN himself has been inspired in this way and i'm sure many others too.
Attainments couched in terms like 'arhatship' , 'buddhahood' is quite strange to me cos one can always share where one is in terms of one's direct experience. To proclaim with such labels is quite pointless IMO, and we know what the Diamond sutra has to say with regards to dwelling on such things.
Having said that, one of the great obstacle in practice nowadays is the hankering after attainment. The expectation and hope/fear is always making one fixate. Fixation is one of the factors that leads to deviant paths / states as stated in the Shurangama sutra.
we always say that meditation or any spiritual pursuit has to be done in the right spirit, with the altruistic motivation. And so due to disclosure of one's own experience, if competitiveness arises to the point of jealousy and other kleshas, then it is also pointless.
there are many sides to the picture. And we see that many past masters have presented their experiences in many different ways, some in more overt manner, some in a more hinting fashion. So I think we should allow the variety of styles to exist but yet, i myself should think that since this is the degenerated age then it is very fair to warn all those out there to be extremely cautious with the counsel they seek. In part, because there are so many demons and what are demons actually, but really people taken over by the inner poisons of attachment, aversion and ignorance... and their own selfish aims and agendas... so it is good to have a pinch of salt with everything.
If you find someone who you want to learn from, he should have the qualities of being accomplished and having the genuine and utmost wish to help you be liberated. Mainly compassion and wisdom. That is very impt. The internet is full of articles about how to identify authentic teachers. It is pointless to harp on about whether someone is authentic or not. Everyone has to decide for themselves and face the consequences.
Originally posted by Jamber:people tend to have a double standard when it comes to dealing with matters in daily life vs. spiritual life.
in daily life, when i need someone to fix my broken pipes, i would want to consult a person who clearly proclaims himself to be a fully certified plumber and preferably good reference from friends.
in daily life, when i am involved in legal issues, i would want to consult a person who clearly proclaims himself to be a fully certified lawyer and pay good money for his service.
in daily life, when i want to sell my house, i would want to engage a person who clearly proclaims himself to be a fully certified property agent and he obviously gets paid good commission on a successful deal.
in spiritual life, when i want to seek authentic practice:
i am distrustful to go to a teacher if he happens to clearly proclaims himself to be a XXXX (insert preferred spiritual attainment here - Arahant, Bodhisattva, Awakened... etc) - but i will demand to see my doctor's full qualification before allowing him to diagnose my illness.
i expect free-of-charge service from my teacher who will guide me to direct awakening, coz talking about money is a taboo - but i will pay good money to my lawyer for his few "pointing out instructions" to get me out of my legal mess.
i would prefer my teacher to keep his professional practical experience and attainment as vague as possible, coz anything clearer and more direct would be construed as politically-incorrect or worse, lies - but i will demand full disclosure of my child's tuition teacher resume and experience before hiring him.
the hardcore dharma movement is to normalize such disparate double standards in people and bring spiritual practice down from the airy-fairy pedestal and hopefully instill a down-to-earth, can-do and common-place practice attitude in the society, just like any other mundance activities we engage ourselves in.
my half-cent worth.
If it were only as simple as seeking a service with accreditations.
Claims are a dozen to the dime! However. it may good for the good ole US of A, home of crass commercialism. You have probably forgot to remember all the false prophets in the internet, or that there are also people who shop around for the BEST religion and the BEST teacher, with all the credentials. But that does'nt guarantee anything. Shopping for the best only means you want or possess the best, does they really want enlightenment?!! Good teachings and transmission do occur, but it only works if there is a effective teacher/student relationship.
There are different vehicle for different sentient beings, it is not a one side fits all. So in context of all these, what do you make of your teacher, your guide who do not make such claims?!
“O monks and wise men, just as a goldsmith would test his gold by burning, cutting and rubbing it, so must you examine my words and accept them, not merely out of reverence for me.”
Shakyamuni Buddha
Originally posted by geis:hello long time no see :)
wow very keen observation!
can this also be a manifestation of subtle ego fears?
yeah man.. time flies since we last met!
i feel its more of our collective social conditioning and expectation of what's perceived to be politically-correct when it comes to spiritual matters from the practical and scholarly aspects. what can be brought into an open forum for discussion and what should be done behind closed doors.
example, notice how there are tons of basic meditation courses offered out there? i've attended a couple and it is always useful for beginners, especially the Q&As and discussions where everyone can benefit from each other's experience.
but notice there isn't any intermediate or advanced meditation courses? not in public that i know of anyway. pls let me know if anyone is aware of one coz i'm definitely interested :-)
is it because majority of the folks are generally not interested to practice beyond the basic relax-and-feel-good level? or perhaps is it a taboo to not share openly about practical meditative experiences and how to help fellow intermediate/advanced practitioners to progress further along the path? or the fear that any open discussions about direct meditative experience (or gasp... attainments!) will be deemed too weird or unacceptable by our social norms?
so the above situation applies to the practical aspect. interesting thing is, from the scholarly aspect, notice there are tons of basic buddhist course, and intermediate course, and advanced course, all the way to Ph.D, that you can easily find in public? there is no shame, discomfort or awkwardness when someone proclaims that he has achieved the highest Ph.D attainment. from a scholarly standpoint at least :-P
and you can find tons of intellectual debates and discussions about the "truth" of your views vs my views. but again, pretty silent and rare when it comes to debates and discussions about real direct practical meditative experiences. why is that so?
i guess i'm still struggling to rationalize why the disparate social expectations and norms when it comes to practice and study when both aspects should be balanced and equally focused upon for meaningful individual progress along the path.
Originally posted by Weychin:If it were only as simple as seeking a service with accreditations.
Claims are a dozen to the dime! However. it may good for the good ole US of A, home of crass commercialism. You have probably forgot to remember all the false prophets in the internet, or that there are also people who shop around for the BEST religion and the BEST teacher, with all the credentials. But that does'nt guarantee anything. Shopping for the best only means you want or possess the best, does they really want enlightenment?!! Good teachings and transmission do occur, but it only works if there is a effective teacher/student relationship.
There are different vehicle for different sentient beings, it is not a one side fits all. So in context of all these, what do you make of your teacher, your guide who do not make such claims?!
“O monks and wise men, just as a goldsmith would test his gold by burning, cutting and rubbing it, so must you examine my words and accept them, not merely out of reverence for me.”
Shakyamuni Buddha
there is no one approach that solves everything. full disclosure or operating behind opacity, both scenarios will not prevent false proclaimers from flourishing. i guess one will know authenticity only after taking the leap of faith.
i always imagine if i were to live during the olden days, and this guy named Siddhartha Gautama who just got enlightened came along and proclaims himself as the Buddha. will i take the leap of faith and follow his teachings, or will i dismiss him as "here comes another guy with attainments"? i guess those who eventually did followed the Buddha just took the leap.
Originally posted by Jamber:there is no one approach that solves everything. full disclosure or operating behind opacity, both scenarios will not prevent false proclaimers from flourishing. i guess one will know authenticity only after taking the leap of faith.
i always imagine if i were to live during the olden days, and this guy named Siddhartha Gautama who just got enlightened came along and proclaims himself as the Buddha. will i take the leap of faith and follow his teachings, or will i dismiss him as "here comes another guy with attainments"? i guess those who eventually did followed the Buddha just took the leap.
Yes, I am grateful that the Buddha did turn the Wheel of Dharma, even though he initially felt what he realised was so profound that people may be unable accept it. Thankfully, we have 2553 years(?) of the Dharma.
Anyway, when Rahula went and asked the Buddha for his inheritance, he gave him the tonsure and ordained him. So if you really want to be the son of the conqueror, you do likewise.
You let go and ordain yourself and enter the full time occupation of seeking enlightenment. You do not bother yourselves with mundane matters anymore. Cutting all fetters and seek arahantship.
In the Varjayana tradition, there is the mandala offering of mudra, which is the offering of everything, represented by Mt. Meru at the center. That means giving up everything! So I asked myself genuinely. do I really mean to seek enlightenment, or is it just a case of having your cake and eating it too? I know the answer about myself, what about you?
Anyway, thank you for your insightful views, it will take me some time to ruminate over it!
http://www.interactivebuddha.com/talkinboutit.shtml
There is a website called access to insight that I generally think is excellent. It provides one of the largest
on-line English translation selection of the original texts as well as a
huge amount of other useful information, including a section of
questions and answers on Buddhism.
There is a section of it (click here)
in which they answer a question about whether or not there are
enlightened beings around today and how to know. I like most of the
advice they give, but take some issue with the following advice found at
the end of their (John Bullitt's) answer:
Finally, one rule of thumb that I've found helpful: someone who goes around claiming to be enlightened (or dropping hints to that effect) probably isn't—at least not in the sense the Buddha had in mind.
As one crusader for bringing things back down to earth,
empowering everyone to aim high in their spiritual practice, and
standing up against harmful taboos, I submit the following reply to that
assertion:
I have a great deal of experience with people who have had to wrestle
with this question from both sides of it, meaning that I know lots of
people looking for enlightened beings, and I know lots of living
enlightened beings wondering about how in the world to talk about it in
ways that are skillful. I have also been lucky enough to hear both
groups' candid opinions on these issues. I also have some knowledge of
the examples from the old texts of the various strains of Buddhism that
give examples of enlightened beings handling it in various ways. I will
address the later two:
Examples of people actively claiming enlightenment include:
Examples of people not claiming it who are:
Benefits include (assuming one didn't blow it and claim enlightenment when not actually enlightened):
It needs to be the acknowledgment that throughout the ages psychopaths
and cons have routinely claimed enlightenment when they weren't for all
sorts of basically evil and deluded reasons, and massive badness, theft,
exploitation, and death has resulted from this, but that does not
contradict the points I mention above at all. It does, however, require
careful vigilance, as well as holding those who claim enlightenment to
the exact same basic and perennial moral codes that everyone should be
held to. I refer you to the excellent book by William (Bill) Hamilton
called Saints and Psychopaths for more useful discussion of
this and the above topics. I agree wholeheartedly with the advice given
in the answer to the question about watching people for long periods of
time before making up one's mind and the cautions about watching one's
own delusions and defilements.
A few more thoughts:
In short, the basic sentiment, which I have heard oft repeated and
appears on that fine site, that those who claim enlightenment can't be,
is patently absurd and clearly not in keeping with any of the Buddhist
traditions I know of, not substantiated by the texts, not part of the
practices of the lineages we all respect, not part of the legends, and
not what happens today, as well as being one more thing that gets in the
way of those who are brave enough to face all the difficulties that
come from saying one is enlightened and teaching from that place.
Again, I hope that people develop into the spiritual adults they are
capable of being and that conversations around awakening become freed
from foolish taboos. These are my thoughts as they come to me this
afternoon. I hope you have found them useful.
<< Back to Essays Page