A new member mentioned he met Sujin in Bangkok.
I was at that meeting and we also had a discussion on Dhammawheel. I will post some of that in this thread.
2 Likes
Sujin always points to the Dhamma as laid out in the Tipitaka and Commentaries as the only reliable guides. Not her teachings or anyone’s except the Buddha and the great ancient bhikkhus.
Of course when she was young she had a teacher, Ajarn Naeb Mahaniranonda ( died 1983) but later studied by herself when she found aspects of the technique- like all techniques- somewhat contrived.
I spent a few months at the ajarn Naeb center, it is still there, but like Sujin I find more interest now in what is here and now anytime.
Hoping to find a teacher, a system, a lineage, we can follow who will tell us what to do it is possible to get trapped in some wrong way. It can be quite subtle. ( of course asking questions and discussing with wise teachers is good).
So we , as Buddhist, are not searching for some special technique that suits us, some teacher who tells us what to do. Rather we take the Dhamma as our refuge and start to learn what satipatthana really is…
The investigation of Dhamma is not like a scholar studies but is studying life itself.
I was in Sri Lanka 7 or 8 months ago and listened to ven. Maggavihari talk on Abhidhamma at a large vihara. Many young bhikkhu were there and some good questions were asked. This is the way it should be: listening, studying, questioning respectfully, contemplating and above all seeing that Abhidhamma is daily life.
joch_ixtab: Still on second thought there’s a lot I’m confused about. To what extent can anyone go straight to the Buddha’s teaching without a living guide or authoritative guide(s)? I understand that we should not cling to lineages, masters, methods etc. But who do you go to for correct explanation of the Dhamma if there is no one besides the Tipitaka and the Ancient Bhikkhus to directly interpret, itself which might lead to extreme confusion and misinterpretation on the readers part.
You do mention that wise masters instruction is beneficial. And I guess what I’m fundamentally asking is who those masters are and if they can be said to be a tendency within Classical Theravada which Ajahn Sujin is a part of. Since the approach is so distinctive from all the other forms of Theravada teaching like Luang Por Chah and Luang Por Mun
Just meaning to get a better understanding of how this works.
Your points are important. After all if we listen to a teacher who has misunderstood the Dhamma then we can end up with something less than real insight.
Anguttara Nikaya Book of the tens XI (iii) 103 Wrongness
From wrong view proceeds wrong thinking; from that wrong speech. From wrong speech, wrong action. From wrong action, wrong living; from that wrong effort. From wrong effort proceeds wrong mindfulness; from that wrong concentration. From wrong concentration proceeds wrong knowledge. From wrong knowledge proceeds wrong release……
From right view proceeds right thinking; from that right speech……right release.
Sujin Borihanwanaket is a renowned teacher of Abidhamma-
yes that is true. But even that is no guarantee of right view.
.
suttacentral.net/an5.88/en/sujato
Numbered Discourses 5.88
Aṅguttara Nikāya 5[quote]
9. Senior Mendicants
9. Theravagga
Senior Mendicants
88. Therasutta
“Mendicants, a senior mendicant who has five qualities is acting for the hurt and unhappiness of the people, for the harm, hurt, and suffering of gods and humans.
“Pañcahi, bhikkhave, dhammehi samannāgato thero bhikkhu bahujanaahitāya paṭipanno hoti bahujanaasukhāya bahuno janassa anatthāya ahitāya dukkhāya devamanussānaṁ.What five?
They are senior and have long gone forth.
They’re well-known, famous, with a large following that includes both laypeople and renunciates
They’re very learned, remembering and keeping what they’ve learned. These teachings are good in the beginning, good in the middle, and good in the end, meaningful and well-phrased, describing a spiritual practice that’s entirely full and pure. They are very learned in such teachings, remembering them, reinforcing them by recitation, mentally scrutinizing them, and comprehending them theoretically.
But they have wrong view and distorted perspective. They draw many people away from the true teaching and establish them in false teachings
So it is difficult to tell who has right view. Nevertheless a first step should be to check: does what such and such a teacher say align with Sutta ( sutta meaning the entire Tipitaka), does it agree with the ancients who resided at the Mahavihara in Sri lanka and edited the original Commentaries. Or are there little alterations, or new ideas introduced…
Many years ago I discussed Dhamma with a well known teacher of vipassana who taught Ajarn Naeb technique. He sometimes listened to Sujin’s radio program and told me that Sujin was correct in what she taught but that the ‘practice’ could be a little different. That doesn’t make sense to me.
Anyway to conclude this post, I think the most direct way to know if a teacher has right view is whether they understand anatta: the teaching unique to Buddha’s. Or do they think sati, for example can be arranged at will. Do they really see that the elements are conditioned in diverse ways and fall away instantly.
The world is sunnata, void of self, simply khandhas arising and ceasing, so we learn. I would posit that anyone who can grasp this correctly, even at a basic level, will find that they live a life that falls in line with the way things really are.
Yes, as can be seen just on Buddhist forums confusion and misinterpretation is rife. And these are Buddhist serious enough to take the time to do at least some study of the teachings. The Internet means that anyone can access the full teachings, but there is no assurance that these are understood.
As I said earlier though at least there are strong markers in the Pali texts of what is the right view and hence right way. And so the wheat can be sifted from the chaff… The one worth listening to can be detected.
A point I would like to again stress here is a quote from the Samyutta nikaya,
22.43.
With Yourselves as an Island
Bhikkhus, dwell with yourselves as an island, with yourselves as a refuge, with no other refuge; with the Dhamma as an island, with the Dhamma as a refuge, with no other refuge. When you dwell with yourselves as an island, with yourselves as a refuge, with no other refuge; with the Dhamma as an island, with the Dhamma as a refuge, with no other refuge
This phrase is repeated in a few suttas and most commonly it continues and explains that developing satipatthana is the path to taking Dhamma as refuge.
In this sutta it has the dependent origination in place of satipatthana.
But it amounts to the same thing- satipatthana is the way that dependent origination is understood and both reveal that there are only conditions with no self anywhere…
Thus we are not taking refuge in any teacher (other than the Buddha).
Nevertheless it can be very helpful to discuss Dhamma with wise teachers - but we shouldn’t just take what they say as gospel. Question them, or even dispute unclear points.
Also examine the mind that is learning Dhamma. When I was new to Dhamma the wish for tangible results was strong - and this is tanha, it is the opposite of the non-attachment that comes with wisdom.
1 Like