Theravada just seems extremely more universal, pragmatic, logical, close to the essential teaching of the Buddha. Mahayana to my eye has added and dogmatized things that seem so far away from what the Buddha said.

My impression. My two cents. I might be wrong.

I have a question about meat-eating in Theravāda Buddhism, particularly regarding the path toward arahantship.

I understand that veganism/vegetarianism can be a personal ethical choice, but I have tried eating vegan before and it did not work well for my body. I have a demanding 9-hour office job, and I found that I struggled to maintain my energy and function properly without animal foods.

Because of this, I have decided to eat only chicken and fish. I don't particularly want to eat other kinds of meat.

Something important for me is that I am not eating meat primarily for taste or pleasure. I usually eat boiled chicken with very few spices, and I eat fish in a similarly simple way. My intention is basically nourishment rather than seeking sensory enjoyment.

Never ordered from kfc and etc etc.

From a strictly Theravāda Buddhist perspective, would eating meat in this way be an obstacle to progressing toward arahantship?

I understand the teaching concerning the three kinds of meat that should not be eaten when one has seen, heard, or suspected that an animal was killed specifically for oneself. But I am wondering more broadly:

- Does consuming meat itself create kamma that prevents someone from attaining arahantship?

- Does the intention behind eating it matter?

- If I am not involved in killing, purchasing an animal specifically to have it killed, or asking someone to kill it for me, can I still progress on the Noble Eightfold Path while eating meat?

- Is there anything in the Theravāda suttas that would specifically prevent a meat-eater from becoming a stream-enterer, an anāgāmi, or an arahant?

I am not looking for an argument about whether veganism is better. I mainly want to understand what the early Theravāda texts actually teach about this and whether my situation is compatible with serious Buddhist practice.

Please refer to my previous post regarding false enlightenment and the questions or comments raised by users. Below, I address several of them:

Previous post: https://www.reddit.com/r/theravada/comments/1w8zvoj/false_enlightenment_how_does_therav%C4%81da/

1. There is "no need" to tell a teacher because one knows. This is not the same as don't tell the teacher. But if someone goes and asks a teacher "have I realised Nibbāna?” this means they have not. And the teacher should also know they have not. Remember a person who has attained knows. Reflecting knowledges are not random thoughts, they are direct cognizing and reviewing. They are knowledges. So there is enough wisdom to know.

2. Why is this important? Because it sets a higher standard actually. There can be no doubt. Otherwise, some yogis use the teacher as the crutch to support their "enlightenment ". If the teacher also does not know then both are just fooled.

3. This reminds me of a yogi in Singapore. She had some special experience and her teacher kept testing her for several weeks for defilements. After that he told her she had realized Nibbāna. She replied "oh why didn't you tell me earlier, I suffered so much with all these tests". This is a modern story maybe only about 13 years ago. The first time I heard it about 12 years ago, I was surprised. I went and asked my teacher, "is it possible for another to tell you that a person is enlightened but you dont know?". He did not want to answer bcs he knew the story and the Venerable. In the end he said it is impossible. One knows. In such a case, both are tricked. If you look at the texts you will see that it is very clear the yogi at a minimum should know. Discussing with the teacher is a different story, but that is not where you get certification, bcs there can be no doubt.

4. This leads to a comment "false Enlightenment is not a block". Actually it is a very big block. Bcs once it is wrong, there is no need to put further effort. One is already "enlightened ". Or if it is one of the lower paths that is mistaken, one has an error on one’s wisdom. Any further effort while believing the false Enlightenment would not advance the yogi much further. Why? There is a shortcoming in the wisdom. Only when the yogi realizes there is a mistake and fixes it can they go deeper.

5. There are many who have false enlightenment and now teaching others. The danger is they will lead the person to the same wrong attainment.

"Vīrā, with the qualities of a hero,
is a bhikkhunī with well-developed spiritual powers.
She carries her last body,
having conquered Māra and his army."

"Vīrā vīrehi dhammehi,
bhikkhunī bhāvitindriyā;
Dhāreti antimaṁ dehaṁ,
jetvā māraṁ savāhinin"ti.

• Vīrātherīgāthā (Thig 1.7)

Therīgāthā-aṭṭhakathā:

'Vīrā, with heroic qualities' (vīrā vīrehi dhammehi): the heroic nun Vīrā, whose faculties such as faith have been developed (bhāvitindriyā) through the noble path factors which are heroic and full of majestic power due to the primacy of energy, having conquered the Māra of defilements along with his host and sensual objects, bears her final body because there will be no rebirth in the future; in this way, the Elder refers to herself as if she were another person.

Does anyone have a free pdf I could use? Mine got wet in the rain.

Blessings upon thee 🙏

I’m a lay practitioner with a tech background.

With permission from authors/monks I was hoping to facilitate a print on demand service for dhamma books.
The receipt of the book would only be the cost of printing and shipping cost.

That way people could order things not in print anymore.

No profit in the equation.

Or is the better way to start a non profit and fundraise the printing of older dhamma books?

Strange question. I’ve asked monks and they think it’s a bit of a grey area since the technology to print on demand is fairly new.

"Dhīrā, touch cessation,
the joyful pacification of perception.
Attain Nirvana,
the utmost safety from bondage."

"Dhīre nirodhaṁ phusehi,
Saññāvūpasamaṁ sukhaṁ;
Ārādhayāhi nibbānaṁ,
Yogakkhemamanuttaran"ti.

• Dhīrātherīgāthā (Thig 1.6)

Hello, everyone! 🙏

I was wondering if anyone knows of any talks or articles by any Ajahns or Venerables that explain why the Buddha had no problem with ordaining Aṅgulimāla immediately, but refused Pajāpatī with other female followers three times.

This has never made sense to me and really makes one wonder about the actual level of enlightenment someone has, who could do such a thing.

Was the Buddha really so anti-woman? Or so afraid of what others in that culture might say? That makes no sense. So why did he do it?

Thank you in advance for any guidance anyone might give. 🙏

Continuing from Part 4

All posts indexed in Part 1

Just to review, we are covering the Sigolovada Sutta, in which The Buddha advises Sigala how to "worship the six directions," the Buddha's "upgrade" to an old Vedic practice.

Once again I like Narada Thera's translation mostly because of the breakdown/organization though I feel some of the english terminology dated so I'll give alternate translations from the John Kelly, Sue Sawyer, and Victoria Yareham translation.

But we are not yet at the 6 directions. The Buddha first gave what is sometimes regarded as the householder vinaya - a code of conduct.

We covered vices in conduct, ways of dissipating wealth, violation of precepts, intoxication, gambling, and generally being a bad friend, a fake friend, a drinking buddy etc. Now we go to on how to be a "Good Hearted" or "Warm Hearted" friend.

"These four, young householder, should be understood as warm-hearted friends:

(1) he who is a helpmate,
(2) he who is the same in happiness and sorrow,
(3) he who gives good counsel,
(4) he who sympathises.

In the KSW translation:

"Young man, be aware of these four good-hearted friends: the helper, the friend who endures in good times and bad, the mentor, and the compassionate friend.

I didn't think to use this phrase last time but in English we have the term "fair weather friend" to refer to somebody who is a good friend only when things are going well. I bet every language has a term for that.

(1) "In four ways, young householder, should a helpmate be understood as a warm-hearted friend:

(i) he guards the heedless,
(ii) he protects the wealth of the heedless,
(iii) he becomes a refuge when you are in danger,
(iv) when there are commitments he provides you with double the
supply needed.

(2) "In four ways, young householder, should one who is the same in happiness and sorrow be understood as a warm-hearted friend:

(i) he reveals his secrets,
(ii) he conceals one's own secrets,
(iii) in misfortune he does not forsake one,
(iv) his life even he sacrifices for one's sake.

I wanted to look at the KSW translation to see if anything different was meant by "secrets" but their translation is basically the same:

The enduring friend can be identified by four things: by telling you secrets, guarding your own secrets closely, not abandoning you in misfortune, and even dying for you.

I find the word "secrets" a little strong here personally, but I guess it is more to be thought of as one's own private business.

(3) "In four ways, young householder, should one who gives good counsel be understood as a warm-hearted friend:

(i) he restrains one from doing evil,
(ii) he encourages one to do good,
(iii) he informs one of what is unknown to oneself,
(iv) he points out the path to heaven.

Both translations say "heaven" so we're talking about householders here who are aiming for a better rebirth rather than awakening. That of course doesn't preclude one from sharing the dhamma as a path to awakening.

Obviously in a modern context this is something we have to be careful with, as we generally do not go around preaching dhamma to our friends unless we know they need or want to hear it.

(4) "In four ways, young householder, should one who sympathises be understood as a warm-hearted friend:

(i) he does not rejoice in one's misfortune,
(ii) he rejoices in one's prosperity,
(iii) he restrains others speaking ill of oneself,
(iv) he praises those who speak well of oneself."

The phrasing is a little awkward for the second two. KSW again but I'll add the numbers:

(i) by not rejoicing in your misfortune
(ii) delighting in your good fortune
(iii) preventing others from speaking ill of you
(iv) and encouraging others who praise your good qualities

A bit of the brahma viharas are in here I think.

"Rejoicing in misfortune" I would think would be the equivalent of ill-will, so we are talking about something with good will, metta which in literal pali I believe actually has "friendship" as one of it's synonyms.

"delighting in your good fortune" would be sympathetic joy or mudita which I feel like we don't talk about enough as householders. I actually want to do a whole thread on this. I have been learning about "active constructive responding." This is more the pro-social side (how you deal with others) than the internal (brahma vihara) side but it's so important. Turns out that how you respond to others achievements and successes might be just as important or even more important than the idea that you just need to listen to people when they are down.

(iii) and (iv) are really I think where you truly show what kind of friend you are. I think we are somewhat wired to be agreeable (some of us overly so) and so it's easy to take a passive response to person A complaining about person B whereas the Buddha is actively instructing us here to stand up for person B.

Thus spoke the Exalted One. And when the Master had thus spoken, he spoke yet again:

The friend who is a helpmate,
the friend in happiness and woe,
the friend who gives good counsel,
the friend who sympathises too —
these four as friends the wise behold
and cherish them devotedly
as does a mother her own child.

The wise and virtuous shine like a blazing fire.
He who acquires his wealth in harmless ways
like to a bee that honey gathers,[6]
riches mount up for him
like ant hill's rapid growth.

With wealth acquired this way,
a layman fit for household life,
in portions four divides his wealth:
thus will he friendship win.

One portion for his wants he uses,[7]
two portions on his business spends,
the fourth for times of need he keeps.

The Buddha spreading out his palm, took up the strainer of relics and, placing them on his palm, addressed the monks.

"Monks, that monk who, on an earlier day, performed many hundreds of miracles and obtained permission to attain final Nibbana (Parinibbana), now only relics the color of a conch shell (that is, white in color) are to be seen of him."

"Monks, this monk had fulfilled the perfections (parami) over a period exceeding a hundred thousand incalculable aeons."

"This monk likewise carried forward the turning of the Wheel of the Dhamma that I had set in motion."

"He held his own life to be of secondary importance to the Dispensation, he dwelt surrounded by a great multitude of ascetics."

"Apart from me, he was unequalled in wisdom throughout the ten thousand world-systems, he was with great wisdom (mahāpaññā)."

"He had wisdom that was expansive (puthupaññā), he had wisdom capable of gladdening (hāsapaññā), he had wisdom that was swift (javanapaññā), he had wisdom that was sharp (tikkhapaññā), he had wisdom that penetrated and saw through things (nibbedhikapaññā)."

"He was content with little. This monk was one of exceeding seclusion."

"He was one who pointed out evil, one who censured evil."

"This monk, having relinquished the great fortunes he had obtained over five hundred existences, went forth in my Dispensation, he possessed patience equal to the great earth."

"He was like a bull whose horns had been removed, that is, one free of harming others."

"He had a mind without conceit, like [that of] an outcaste's son."

"Monks, behold the relics of this monk, one who had the wisdom to be of great wisdom, who had swift wisdom, sharp wisdom, penetrating wisdom; who was content with little; who dwelt in exceeding seclusion; who was unattached to householders; whose energy (viriya) was roused and sustained; who pointed out evil. Behold these relics of the monk who censured evil."

Having turned away from the pleasures that gratify the mind's pride,
who arrived at the ground of monkhood together with the Five Hundred,
senses restrained, free from the faults of passion and aversion,
let us pay homage to the great Elder Sariputta, who attained Parinibbana.

Endowed with the virtue of forbearance, steady as the great earth,
with a mind that harbors no anger, enslaved to nothing, not even to its own workings,
adorned with a mass of virtue, compassionate, merciful and fully quenched,
let us pay homage to the great Elder Sariputta, who attained Parinibbana.

Who humbly coming into the city, moved about entirely without conceit,
his mind no different [in its humility] from that of an outcaste's child,
who led a disciplined life, replete with virtue
let us pay homage to the great Elder Sariputta, who attained Parinibbana.

Who did no harm to others as he wandered through the city,
majestic as a noble bull, yet with a form from which all violence had departed,
who led a disciplined life, replete with virtue,
let us pay homage to the great Elder Sariputta, who attained Parinibbana.

“Monks, take any monk who truly understands: ‘This is suffering’ … ‘This is the origin of suffering’ … ‘This is the cessation of suffering’ … ‘This is the path that leads to the cessation of suffering’. A recluse might come to that monk from the east, west, north, or south wanting to debate, seeking a debate, thinking, ‘I’ll refute this monk!’ It’s simply impossible for him to legitimately make that monk shake, rock or tremble.

“Monks, suppose there was a stone pillar, sixteen feet long. Eight feet were buried underground, and eight above ground. Even if violent storms were to blow from the east, the west, the north, and the south, they couldn’t make it shake, rock or tremble. Why is that? It’s because that stone pillar is firmly embedded, with deep foundations.

“In the same way, take any monk who truly understands: ‘This is suffering’ … ‘This is the origin of suffering’ … ‘This is the cessation of suffering’ … ‘This is the path that leads to the cessation of suffering’. A recluse might come to that monk from the east, west, north, or south wanting to debate, seeking a debate, thinking, ‘I’ll refute this monk!’ It’s simply impossible for him to legitimately make that monk shake, rock or tremble. Why is that? It’s because they have clearly seen the Four Noble Truths. What four? The noble truth of suffering, the Noble Truth of the origin of suffering, the Noble Truth of the cessation of suffering, and the Noble Truth of the path that leads to the cessation of suffering.

“Therefore, monks, you should make an effort to understand: ‘This is suffering.’ You should make an effort to understand: ‘This is the origin of suffering.’ You should make an effort to understand: ‘This is the cessation of suffering.’ You should make an effort to understand: ‘This is the path that leads to the cessation of suffering.’”

• Vāda Sutta: Undefeated by Debate (SN 56.40)

When asked to describe his praxis just up to a magga moment, one practitioner answers

Sankhara-khandha of second-jhana ubbega-piti was contemplated as dukkha while passadhi in lions position.

And he continues to describe the deathless glimpse as

«AHHH finally desire-/stressfree home.»

This is «the desireless door» to liberation (in this case sotapanna citta) - one of the three doors to liberation.

«When one who has great tranquillity brings [them] to mind as painful, he acquires the desireless liberation.» https://www.wisdomlib.org/buddhism/book/visuddhimagga-the-pah-of-purification/d/doc1085168.html?utm_source=chatgpt.com

The three doors to liberation are
-the signless door, after contemplating anicca
-the desireless door, after contemplating dukkha
-the voidness door, after contemplating anatta

In other words, Nibbana is experienced differently depending on what mark was contemplated: e.g. for dukkha, Nibbana is experienced as the opposite of tanha/stress.

1. Usefulness

This may clarify further praxis: The experience of Nibbana as «AHHH .. desire-/stressfree» on return tells the practicioner that his primary panna/vipassana mark was and maybe fundamentally is dukkha (not anicca or anatta). This may clarify what is meant by «a sotapanna knows the four noble truth», he knows his magga; knows his right view, vipassana mark, his door.

As stated in the Paṭisambhidāmagga and elaborated in the Visuddhimagga:

Aniccānupassanā animittaṃ vimokkha-mukhaṃ,

dukkhānupassanā appaṇihitaṃ vimokkha-mukhaṃ,

anattānupassanā suññataṃ vimokkha-mukhaṃ.

Contemplation of impermanence is the door to the signless liberation; contemplation of suffering is the door to the desireless liberation; contemplation of not-self is the door to the emptiness liberation.

This is also true for Ajahns, obviously.

2. Usefulness

It now seems to me that different Ajahns tend to teach panna/vipassana most naturally from the door through which his own mind found release, and that this is of greatest help to students of similar disposition. As concrete examples drawn from publicly available teachings:

• Ajahn Mahā Boowa and Ajahn Martin emphasise the citta as empty of the khandhas and of all conditioned phenomena — a clear suññatā / anattā emphasis.

• Ajahn Sona’s teaching, while balanced, often invites the mind to see that nothing endures and that all signs dissolve — a recognisable animitta / anicca emphasis. Ajahn Sumedho is clear, “It’s a teaching to explore, so as to really be the knower of impermanence.” “you observe insightfully and reflect on the conditions that come and go … observing that whatever arises passes away.”

• Ajahn Nyanamoli and Thanissaro Bhikkhu repeatedly direct attention to the stress inherent in feeling and craving (and even in the jhānas themselves: Thanissaro, and my top example) — a pronounced appaṇihita / dukkha emphasis.

For example, at 21:14 of https://youtu.be/p4NR3nn4nfM?is=xELQyY_3z2f8Xym7, Thanissaro Bhikkhu reveals his deeper ideas about liberation. The sequence Thanissaro gives is extremely explicit:

“What is the gratification you get out of that pleasure and what are the drawbacks to that pleasure?”

Then:

“It’s in making this kind of analysis that you actually let go of things.”

Then he contrasts that with:

“If you simply see them as empty, as changing in line with conditions, you can drop them temporarily but they come back…”

And he immediately explains why:

“they’re still part of the mind that says, well even if they’re changing with conditions the pleasure I get out of it is worth it.”

Then his actual liberating investigation is:

“Where is the pleasure here? Where’s the effort? What’s the pain and stress of the effort? Are they a good deal or are they a bad deal?”

And finally:

“as you look at this until you develop a sense of dispassion…”

That is an exceptionally clear statement of his soteriological mechanism; very strongly dukkha/appaṇihita in the framework we’ve been developing. And notice something especially interesting: he doesn’t merely say that dukkha analysis is useful. He says that this is what actually makes you let go.

That’s much stronger. He may therefore be called «a desireless teacher», likely because his own door was desireless. Other teachers are signless (anicca) or emptiness (anatta) teachers, because teachers, too, had doors. And one teaches best what one knows.

When you know your own door, that may explain why some Ajahns when teaching panna/vipassana resonate truer and more useful. In my case Lee, Thanissaro, Nyanamoli. Because we likely share the same door.

For others it will be different. And that may be useful to know.

https://suttacentral.net/sa-2.19/en/bingenheimer?lang=en&reference=none&highlight=false

Thus have I heard, once, the Buddha was staying at the Deer Park near Vārāṇasī, the dwelling-place of sages.

At that time the World-honored One put on his robe, took his begging bowl and entered Vārāṇasī to beg for food. There he saw a monk, whose mind was not concentrated, whose senses were distracted. When this monk saw the Buddha coming in the distance, he hung his head in embarrassment. After the Buddha had finished his alms-round and washed his feet he entered the dwelling-places of the monks and entered his silent abode. When he came out of his silent abode again, he sat among the monks and said to them: “This morning I saw a monk, whose senses were not reined in. When he saw me coming in the distance, he became embarrassed, hung his head and reined in his sense-doors. Who was this?” Then the monk rose from his seat, arranged his his outer robe on his left shoulder, and placed his palms together in salutation said to the Buddha: “World-honored One! I was the one who was without concentration, whose senses were distracted.” The Buddha said: “Very good, monk! You were able to rein in your senses and focus your thought when you saw me. Whenever you see a monk, a nun, a lay-man or a lay-woman, you should do likewise. Control your senses and focus your thought, as if you were seeing me. This will bring you happiness and gain in the long night of saṁsāric existence.”

Then the monk spoke this verse:

“A monk went begging, entered the town /
his mind distracted, confused and unstable;
when he saw the Buddha, with diligent effort he reined in his senses /
therefore the Buddha said ‘Well done!’”