I heard that it has accounts where the Buddha and a lot of arahants came and visited him. This seems absurd.
2 Likes
It’s completely absurd. You should read it sometime. It is, however, a perfect example of what happens when the Abhidhamma and Commentaries are not taken seriously, as they were in the Thai Forest tradition that he came from. The Thai Forest tradition started off as an extremely noble undertaking, with monks trying to actually attain nibbāna, when many had given up on this goal or thought it no longer possible. Yet we can see that within about 4 generations it became overtaken by wrong views, complete with eternalist saints and mythological stories like the one you referenced. It really didn’t take long for that to happen. Ajahn Sao started teaching Mun sometime around the 1890’s, if I am not mistaken. The biography was first published in 1971, in Thai. So within about eighty years (or 4 generations) we see this fully hypostatized.
Now, whether Mahā Boowa’s accounts of Ajahn Mun’s life and experiences are actually reflective of what Mun claimed himself, or are mostly developed by Mahā Boowa, I can’t say for certain, but we can see what happened nonetheless. Mahā Boowa also implied that he was an arahant himself—one who proclaimed public political views and who used money, and so on, which is also ridiculous, of course.
It’s not very different from what happened after the Buddha’s parinibbāna.
All the schools that did not honor the Abhidhamma fell into wrong views, and they either don’t exist anymore or were absorbed into schools with wrong views that developed much later. Only the Theravāda has remained until now (for a total of 2,500+ years, or 125+ generations). This is simply because it insulated itself from all those wrong views by its rigorous adherence to the Abhidhamma and Commentaries.
You might also enjoy this thread:
R
3 Likes
The story does not appear to be fake. It is a real story handed down by Acharn Maha Boowa who also was considered to be an Arahanta. It is indicative of something that no one wants to think about that is even deeper. All the forest monks in Thailand of that Acharn Mun Tradition did something really amazing. I have heaps of respect for them. I visited Acharn Maha Boowa too. These are monks who have done some serious meditation and need to be respected. So many people have benefited from their teachings.
In Thailand in many monasteries the Arahanta belief leads to other things too. If you see them do something incorrectly by vinaya then they reply Acharn X did this and he was an arahanta so we do it the same way.
In any tradition of Buddhism we have the same. Any person who gets a good dose of samadhi and jhana has the ability to have visions that to us look pretty wierd. It happens in any meditation center.
Pa Auk Sayadaw himself learnt his meditation of 4 elements from such a teacher Than Lyin sayadaw. In their method once you got upacara samadhi you look inside your heart base and see it is pure and many of them thought they were Arahantas.
It was very controversial at the time. They even had a big Arahanta Puja event at Than Lyin and then the Than Lyin Sayadaw died and the whole place fell apart and then years later one of those "Arahanta’s "disrobed and lived in Mawlamyine. Pa Auk Sayadaw told me a story about that guy being on a local bus and in conversation about Than Lyin he said he was a Than Lyin arahanta once. Story illustrates that self deception is completely possible to each human.
Same thing happens everywhere to be honest. Belief first, logic second.
The same occurs at Pa Auk monastery. People have samadhi tell lots of stories and all those people with samadhi amongst themselves disagree. They each accuse the other of being self deceived. Some of those teachers are now teaching in the west.
They are all good people and have some samadhi but I suspect they don’t have the wisdom to discern what is True and what is fiction.
There are lots of other charismatics and people with wild visions in every meditation system.
Even OM Shinrikyo who did a sarin attack in Japanese subway had similar stories.
Tibetan Buddhism has similar look at all the paintings and tantric practices.
It is a big conundrum, but these people can have really good characters and for me I just keep doing what is good and meditating and hopefully I will get to work out what is really going in this samadhi game of chance.
There is only one way to work it all out and that is to meditate and experience it for yourself and leave judgement aside till you realise the truth yourself.
1 Like
Thanks Greg,
Very interesting. But the part I bolded at the end of your post doesn’t account for overestimation. Someone may have experiences that they rate very highly and strongly believe they have attamed. Look at the Brahmajala sutta where even those who attained high levels of real Jhana misconceived them in different ways.
Indeed as you note:
Your stories completely underline my point.
R
Actually it doesn’t underline your point because even monks and meditators in Burma that have access to abhidhamma still have overestimation and think they are conforming to Abhidhamma when they might not be. The point is everyone needs to stop judging and start practising sincerely. It really shows that what we think we know is not certain at all. All those other schools tibetan etc and thai theravada are still there. Maybe we are all blind men stroking an elephant and describing different parts. Hasty dogmatic judgements are the norm. We need to keep our mind open to all possibilities and respect the difficulty of the task we are faced with.
Yes I have lots of stories of people who thought they were enlightened and found out they weren’t Shwe U Min sayadaw was one. He was one of Mahasi’s disciples and everyone thought he was an Arahant even himself. His sati and panna were that strong. Then one day he realised he was not. I can’t remember what the trigger was, but he realised it and cried. After that I can’t tell you what happened but it is interesting took several years of practice before greed, anger or delusion arose in him. I don’t think anyone outside him would have noticed.
1 Like
From commentary to Vinaya
Explanation of the case of overestimation
- “Perceiving as seen what was not seen” means that though arahantship had not in fact been seen by the eye of knowledge, they imagined, “We have seen arahantship.”
The same method applies in “not attained,” and the other expressions.The distinction is this:
- Not attained means not attained in oneself through arising.
- Not realized means not reached through development of the path; it means not obtained.
- Not directly experienced means not penetrated, or not made directly manifest by review-knowledge.
Through overestimation means through the conceit of attainment — the conceit arisen as “We have attained” — or through excessive conceit, stubborn conceit.
They declared final knowledge means they declared arahantship, saying to the monks: “Friends, arahantship has been attained by us; the task has been done.”
Because in them the defilements had not been abandoned by the path, but were only suppressed by the power of serenity and insight, later, when suitable conditions arose, their minds bent toward lust — that is, inclined toward lust. The same method applies to the other cases.
And that was not a matter for legal action means that this declaration of final knowledge on their part is not something that enters into legal determination concerning an offense; it is not a factor of an offense.
Now, in whom does this overestimation arise, and in whom does it not arise?
It does not arise in a noble disciple. For by reviewing path, fruit, Nibbāna, the defilements abandoned, and the remaining defilements, he becomes gladdened and is free from doubt regarding noble attainments. Therefore a stream-enterer and the rest do not wrongly conceive, “I am a once-returner,” and so on.
It does not arise in an immoral person, for he has no hope at all for attaining noble qualities.
It does not arise even in a moral person who has abandoned meditation and is devoted to sleep, socializing, and the like.
But it does arise in one whose virtue is very pure, who is diligent in meditation, who has defined mentality-materiality, crossed over doubt by discerning conditions, superimposed the three characteristics, and is practising insight. In such a beginner in insight it may arise, and once arisen it may stop him short as either:
- one accomplished only in serenity, or
- one accomplished only in insight.
For such a person, because the defilements are suppressed by serenity and formations are well comprehended by insight, defilements may fail to arise for ten, twenty, thirty years. Then he thinks: “I am a stream-enterer,” or “a once-returner,” or “a non-returner.”
But if he is accomplished in both serenity and insight, it stops him only at arahantship. Since the defilements are suppressed by concentration, and formations are well grasped by insight, for sixty years, eighty years, even a hundred years, defilements may not arise, and his mental conduct is like that of an arahant. Seeing no arising of defilements for such a long time, he comes to think: “I am an arahant.”
1 Like