Pride

[plwk]

http://viewonbuddhism.org/delusions_pri ... iness.html
"If we see pride among people who have no idea about Dharma, it is understandable.
However, if afflictive emotions and haughtiness are present among Dharma practitioners, it is great disgrace to practice"
His Holiness the 14th Dalai Lama

Opinions?

[gregkavarnos]

Sorry for being repetitive but I feel that the following statement is extraordinarily valid for this subject. It is possibly a succinct explanation of why pride arises in Dharma/Dhamma practitioners:

Practising Without Ego-Centred Motivation
by Lama Gendun Rinpoche
One of the main defects of a practitioner comes from thinking, "I am the one who is practising, so I am the one who will realise this and that through my practice". As long as we think that we are the ones who practise and that any outcome will be because we made the necessary effort, we are completely in the wrong. Nothing will result from that except more ego-clinging and self-importance.

We should think quite the opposite: that everything that emerges in our practice does so thanks to the Dharma. All the qualities that appear are only because of the Dharma. It is only through the quality, the power and purity of the Dharma itself that something can change in us. This is the way all the great bodhisattvas have practised. There is nothing that comes from the individual — things emerge because of the quality of the teaching. It is through his relationship with the Dharma that an ordinary practitioner can transform himself and become a great bodhisattva. All the qualities that emerge in a great bodhisattva have nothing to do with the individual person. They are the same qualities that are to be found in all bodhisattvas, because they come from the same Dharma, they express the quality of the teaching itself.

We should be happy and think, "Now I have decided definitely to practise the Dharma, there is nothing else that interests me in this life, I want to dedicate my life totally to this. Whatever comes out of my practice is thanks to the Dharma, it has nothing to do with me. I am not going to take pride in the results as if they were mine." When we surrender ourselves in this way and just practise the Dharma with no speculations about the outcome, we completely abandon ourselves to the practice. We are not expecting something out of it. We abandon all attachment to experiences and results of practice and engage in Dharma activity. This is when true experiences and realisations can develop.

But first we have to completely give up this feeling of "I am doing something, I am getting results", always bringing everything back to the "I". If we do this, we are just nourishing the ego-feeling, which shows a lack of confidence in the teaching. If we have complete confidence in the Dharma, we no longer have any feeling of "I". We just do the practice, and then the Dharma starts to work and real transformation takes place. This is the only way that experiences and realisation can develop.

We can measure the progress of our practice like this. If we think, "I have practised and I have realised that", then the only result of our practice is that our I-feeling is getting coarser and coarser, so our practice is completely wrong, since the very purpose of the Dharma is to reduce the influence of the ego. But if we think "I am not a good practitioner, I have no real qualities myself", that shows that our feeling of "I" is growing smaller and more subtle and that we are becoming a genuine practitioner. A real Dharma practitioner is someone who is constantly putting aside his own benefit and concern for himself.

Again, sorry for being repetitive.

[mudra]

......
We should think quite the opposite: that everything that emerges in our practice does so thanks to the Dharma. All the qualities that appear are only because of the Dharma. It is only through the quality, the power and purity of the Dharma itself that something can change in us.

.......We should be happy and think, "Now I have decided definitely to practise the Dharma, there is nothing else that interests me in this life, I want to dedicate my life totally to this. Whatever comes out of my practice is thanks to the Dharma.....

Greg, no problem if that was repeated again - excellent advice!

[ground]

http://viewonbuddhism.org/delusions_pri ... iness.html
"If we see pride among people who have no idea about Dharma, it is understandable.
However, if afflictive emotions and haughtiness are present among Dharma practitioners, it is great disgrace to practice"
His Holiness the 14th Dalai Lama

Opinions?

Clinging aggregates.

Kind regards

[ground]

May be more prominent in Mahayana because of "my school", "my guru" etc.

Actually the view of self is cultivated implicitly due to "helping others"

Kind regards

[Indrajala]

The first step, perhaps, is not to reject one's pride but to acknowledge the existence of it and observe it.

You can be proud of the dharma practitioner who openly acknowledges their afflictions and tries as much as possible not to be entangled by them.

[tobes]

Sorry for being repetitive but I feel that the following statement is extraordinarily valid for this subject. It is possibly a succinct explanation of why pride arises in Dharma/Dhamma practitioners:

Practising Without Ego-Centred Motivation
by Lama Gendun Rinpoche
One of the main defects of a practitioner comes from thinking, "I am the one who is practising, so I am the one who will realise this and that through my practice". As long as we think that we are the ones who practise and that any outcome will be because we made the necessary effort, we are completely in the wrong. Nothing will result from that except more ego-clinging and self-importance.

We should think quite the opposite: that everything that emerges in our practice does so thanks to the Dharma. All the qualities that appear are only because of the Dharma. It is only through the quality, the power and purity of the Dharma itself that something can change in us. This is the way all the great bodhisattvas have practised. There is nothing that comes from the individual — things emerge because of the quality of the teaching. It is through his relationship with the Dharma that an ordinary practitioner can transform himself and become a great bodhisattva. All the qualities that emerge in a great bodhisattva have nothing to do with the individual person. They are the same qualities that are to be found in all bodhisattvas, because they come from the same Dharma, they express the quality of the teaching itself.

We should be happy and think, "Now I have decided definitely to practise the Dharma, there is nothing else that interests me in this life, I want to dedicate my life totally to this. Whatever comes out of my practice is thanks to the Dharma, it has nothing to do with me. I am not going to take pride in the results as if they were mine." When we surrender ourselves in this way and just practise the Dharma with no speculations about the outcome, we completely abandon ourselves to the practice. We are not expecting something out of it. We abandon all attachment to experiences and results of practice and engage in Dharma activity. This is when true experiences and realisations can develop.

But first we have to completely give up this feeling of "I am doing something, I am getting results", always bringing everything back to the "I". If we do this, we are just nourishing the ego-feeling, which shows a lack of confidence in the teaching. If we have complete confidence in the Dharma, we no longer have any feeling of "I". We just do the practice, and then the Dharma starts to work and real transformation takes place. This is the only way that experiences and realisation can develop.

We can measure the progress of our practice like this. If we think, "I have practised and I have realised that", then the only result of our practice is that our I-feeling is getting coarser and coarser, so our practice is completely wrong, since the very purpose of the Dharma is to reduce the influence of the ego. But if we think "I am not a good practitioner, I have no real qualities myself", that shows that our feeling of "I" is growing smaller and more subtle and that we are becoming a genuine practitioner. A real Dharma practitioner is someone who is constantly putting aside his own benefit and concern for himself.

Again, sorry for being repetitive.

It is a really excellent bit of advice.

But I wonder if it underplays the immense role of effort and will involved in being a sincere dharma practitioner. There is no reason why acknowledging that automatically implies a sense of "I".

What I mean is that asserting that everything good arises from something external may be good pedagogically, but it actually isn't entirely true!

[ground]

What I mean is that asserting that everything good arises from something external may be good pedagogically, but it actually isn't entirely true!

What "external" do you refer to?

Kind regards

[gregkavarnos]

External of what? Internal to whom?
Who makes the effort? Who reaps the fruits?
To answer requires ignorance, to answer requires wisdom.
Beyond the confines of dualism dwell the Conquerors and their Sons.

[gregkavarnos]

PS

Buddhas and Bodhisattvas see clearly that our neglect of others, our self-preoccupation and our disregard for the connection between actions and their effects are responsible for all our miseries. The feeling that it doesn't matter what we do as long as we can get away with it kills our chances of liberation and enlightenment. Our selfishness robs us of worldly and supramundane good qualities, leaving us naked and empty-handed. It separates us from happiness now and in the future and fetters us to suffering.

Resolve never again to let yourself be dominated by this mean and selfish way of thinking and do everything in your power to combat it. Your happiness begins the moment you recognize self-cherishing as your chief foe. There are many good reasons why cherishing others makes sense. Shantideva says:

The state of Buddhahood is accomplished
Equally through living beings and Victorious Ones.
What kind of behavior then is it to revere
Victorious Ones but not living beings?

...If we truly want to please Buddhas and Bodhisattvas and all those noble beings in the world whom we admire and whose sole guiding principles are their affection, love and compassion for others, we can do nothing better than to cherish living beings.

The Three Principal Aspects of the Path an oral teaching by Geshe Sonam Rinchen translated and edited by Ruth Sonam

[tobes]

What I mean is that asserting that everything good arises from something external may be good pedagogically, but it actually isn't entirely true!

What "external" do you refer to?

Kind regards

"It is only through the quality, the power and purity of the Dharma itself that something can change in us"

i.e The Dharma as an 'itself' implies external teachings.

[tobes]

External of what? Internal to whom?
Who makes the effort? Who reaps the fruits?
To answer requires ignorance, to answer requires wisdom.
Beyond the confines of dualism dwell the Conquerors and their Sons.

There may be no atman, but there is always cetana.

[tobes]

PS

Buddhas and Bodhisattvas see clearly that our neglect of others, our self-preoccupation and our disregard for the connection between actions and their effects are responsible for all our miseries. The feeling that it doesn't matter what we do as long as we can get away with it kills our chances of liberation and enlightenment. Our selfishness robs us of worldly and supramundane good qualities, leaving us naked and empty-handed. It separates us from happiness now and in the future and fetters us to suffering.

Resolve never again to let yourself be dominated by this mean and selfish way of thinking and do everything in your power to combat it. Your happiness begins the moment you recognize self-cherishing as your chief foe. There are many good reasons why cherishing others makes sense. Shantideva says:

The state of Buddhahood is accomplished
Equally through living beings and Victorious Ones.
What kind of behavior then is it to revere
Victorious Ones but not living beings?

...If we truly want to please Buddhas and Bodhisattvas and all those noble beings in the world whom we admire and whose sole guiding principles are their affection, love and compassion for others, we can do nothing better than to cherish living beings.

The Three Principal Aspects of the Path an oral teaching by Geshe Sonam Rinchen translated and edited by Ruth Sonam

Does it not take a very great deal of effort to cultivate bodhicitta?

[gregkavarnos]

Doubting and fearing that the dissolution of Self will lead to liberation,
The ignorant grasp agonizingly at words and concepts
A precarious life raft floating on the ocean of Samsara
With Mara at the helm.

[tobes]

Doubting and fearing that the dissolution of Self will lead to liberation,
The ignorant grasp agonizingly at words and concepts
A precarious life raft floating on the ocean of Samsara
With Mara at the helm.

Yes, but it is an internet forum. We only have words and concepts at our disposal here....

If you do not agree with something, I think it is more fruitful to point out why, rather than deploy the old "you're an ignorant mara" stanza.

(Which of course, is probably more or less appropriate in my case - but still, tact is always a cyber upaya).

[gregkavarnos]

"It is only through the quality, the power and purity of the Dharma itself that something can change in us"
i.e The Dharma as an 'itself' implies external teachings.

Here you are clearly confusing the moon, with the finger pointing at the moon. Language can never clearly express/explain experience. Also, let us not forget language barriers. Lama Gendeun Rinpoche was a Tibetan refugee who escaped to India and was then sent to Europe (in 1975) by the 16th Karmapa to teach Dharma. He spent thirty years in solitary cave retreats in Tibet and his teachings are based on his experiences.

There may be no atman, but there is always cetana.

And there is somebody there that has volition? Where exactly? Can volition exist without a self? How exactly?

Does it not take a very great deal of effort to cultivate bodhicitta?

Nope, all you need to do is cut off ego-clinging and you'll find bodhicitta was there all along. Ain't the Tathagatagarbha great!? Take an Arhat, for example (no please take one, free of charge, no strings attached): "An arahant is a person who has destroyed greed, hatred, and delusion - the unwholesome roots which underlie all fetters - who upon decease will not be reborn in any world, having wholly cut off all fetters that bind a person to the samsara." So, are we under the delusion that, upon achieving Nirvana, bodhicitta would not spontaneously arise for an Arahant? That by destroying greed. hatred and delusion one would not (automatically) be filled by an overwhelming sense of (enlightened) love and compassion?
Whether one goes clockwise direction (develop compassion, love and wisdom) or an anti-clockwise direction (destroy greed, hatred and delusion) they always come back to the same point.

PS I'm sorry I didn't know the stanza was old, next time I'll whip you up fresh one and I'll throw in the choclate sprinkles "on the house".

[Rael]

There may be no atman, but there is always cetana.

Isn't the fact Atman denotes an inherent soul like substance that makes it so non Buddhist thought...

If you can change the concept to something like an ever changing mind uncreated and always in flux , don't you get a more Buddhist thoughtish notion ....


wow thats the most ramble weirdness i wrote here....it's more like abstract paint thrown on a wall.....

[ground]

What I mean is that asserting that everything good arises from something external may be good pedagogically, but it actually isn't entirely true!

What "external" do you refer to?

Kind regards

"It is only through the quality, the power and purity of the Dharma itself that something can change in us"

i.e The Dharma as an 'itself' implies external teachings.

But what you call "external" is just signs and sounds without inherent meaning.


Kind regards

[tobes]

"It is only through the quality, the power and purity of the Dharma itself that something can change in us"
i.e The Dharma as an 'itself' implies external teachings.

Here you are clearly confusing the moon, with the finger pointing at the moon. Language can never clearly express/explain experience. Also, let us not forget language barriers. Lama Gendeun Rinpoche was a Tibetan refugee who escaped to India and was then sent to Europe (in 1975) by the 16th Karmapa to teach Dharma. He spent thirty years in solitary cave retreats in Tibet and his teachings are based on his experiences.
Nope, all you need to do is cut off ego-clinging and you'll find bodhicitta was there all along. Ain't the Tathagatagarbha great!?

Okay, so in this case the Dharma is ones internal Buddha nature? The Dharmakaya?

[tobes]

There may be no atman, but there is always cetana.

And there is somebody there that has volition? Where exactly? Can volition exist without a self? How exactly?

Isn't this precisely the Buddhist theory of the mind: volition existing without a self.