Re: [dsg] Hit your finger with a hammer!
- Hi Rob E,
> > It is the meditator who is contradicting himself. He agrees that theYou consider my idea dogmatic does not make it so. From where I stand,
> > Buddha taught about the Five Khandhas and that these have the
> > characteristic of anicca, dukkha and anatta. Yet his attitude towards
> > practice is based clearly on the perception and view of "self" which he
> > keeps defending endlessly.
> This disparaging characterization of all meditators is presumptuous,
> and based only on the dogmatic idea that one cannot engage with
> meditation without indulging self-view. This has been assumed by many
> dsg members such as yourself, but has never been logically
> demonstrated. It is stated over and over that "formal meditation" is
> an expression of self-view and control, but that is not necessarily
> the case, any more than reading Abhidhamma must be an expression of
> self-view. I wish this recurrent presumption would not be stated as a
> general rule, as if there is no doubt about it, and all meditators are
> deluded indulgers in self-view. This is not the case, and is a wrong
> view about meditation and meditators.
its a matter of you not able to see that you are wrong and that I'm
right. Do I have doubt? Yes, in the sense of having only intellectual
understanding and far from realization. But when it comes to assessing
the position held by meditators and recognizing the wrong view
expressed, whatever little understanding that occasionally arises, has
been reason for confidence rather than any wavering.
I say that *all* those who meditate in the name of Dhamma practice do so
as a result of wrong view! It is not possible that Right View will agree
with the idea of formal meditation.
You say that this position itself is wrong view. Please tell me how this
is so, and I will explain to you why I think as I do.
In the meantime I will continue to state that all formal meditation is
the result of wrong view.
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Hi Rob ERE: Hi Jon.
> RE: I will get into the next part about the Satipatthana sutta later, as I need to look at it to continue the discussion.
> J: Glad to hear you'll be checking out the text of the sutta for a change!! :-))
:-) I appreciate what I desperately hope is your humor here, and if so, is very funny.
I will get back to you with the usual sutta quotes as soon as I can. :-)
Very very funny, Jon. ; - /
- - - - - - - - - -
J: You may have forgotten in the confusion over the new format that you have already come back with a quote from the Satipatthana Sutta. My reply to your message can be found here: