Skip to main content

If being direct and truthful (even if the truth is uncomfortable) is inappropriate, so be it.





regarding the title of a recent article of mine:

Ajahn Brahmali interpretation of disembodied jhāna: Bald faced lie, willful ignorance due to confirmation bias, or gross incompetence?



someone said:

You are correct that Frank's behavior is not appropriate

https://www.reddit.com/r/theravada/comments/15h2lla/comment/jur915h/?context=3

Frankk response


If being direct and truthful (even if the truth is uncomfortable) is inappropriate, so be it.

You want to go back to old times where "appropriate" speech means you keep quiet about crimes even though millions of people are harmed by not knowing the truth?

Or you use such polite, respectful euphemistic speech that people don't even realize what you're describing is a serious crime (against Dhamma)?

Why do you think bottles of poison have a picture of a skull and cross bones? And not a euphemistic "the contents of this bottle may have side effects".

How do you think pedophile catholic priests were just shuffled around the world to different parishs to molest new sets of children?

Because of respectful "appropriate" speech, euphemisms, and keeping silent in the face of crime.




Sujato wrong view of Vitakka: Prime example where direct truth works better than deferential politeness  


Take a look at the date of Remy's blog post criticising Sujato's wrong interpretation of vitakka from 2016.

Why vitakka might mean ‘thinking’ in jhana

Publié le 22 décembre 2016 par Rémy

http://blog.buddha-vacana.org/why-vitakka-might-mean-thinking-in-jhana/

Here's your prime example of polite speech, deferential speech to a "respected monk". He posted this in 2016 in suttacentral.

Sujato never responded: either pretended to or didn't even read an article so thoughtfully and politely expressed.

From that, and other examples like that, I learned my lesson that politeness has its limits.

I've been on a mission since to raise public awareness on egregious crimes against the Dhamma.

When I first posted my criticisms on Sujato's V&V, with my direct truthful style which you call "intentional provocation", I got lots of pushback, censoring, etc.

But year by year, with my persistence and patience, the pushback got less and less, and people stopped posting Sujato's ridiculous article which redefined V&V with sophistry that Remy's blog post was criticizing.

Gradually, you heard less people using fallacious reasoning of Sujato, and less people criticizing me and my correct interpretation of V&V.

So from my experience, especially if the subject requires some technical expertise to understand in the first place, if you try to tone down the truth in deference to some aribtrary standard of what is "approrpriate" in addressing an ordained monastic's wrong views, it just get completely ignored or quickly forgotten like with Remy's nice post.

It's the people who are persistent and patient enough to keep repeating the message with plain, direct language that doesn't downplay the severity of the crime, that finally get through to people.

Back in 2016 when Remy posted his polite critique, if you googled "vitakka and vicara in first jhana",

Sujato's article of wrong views on V&V and first jhāna came up

as the first option or one of the top options:

https://sujato.wordpress.com/2012/12/06/why-vitakka-doesnt-mean-thinking-in-jhana/

Now in 2023 you google again for "first jhana vitakka and vicara" the very first result is a suttacentral thread where I explain how Vism. and Sujato redefine it into a bowl full of wrong.

An article by Thanissaro (with correct V&V) is near the top, and Sujato's article you have to scroll down for a while before you get it.


What feels like intentional provocation and tabloid journalism to you (from my tone of criticizing recalcitrant monastics) , is only so because the normal "appropriate" style of critique towards monastics is so meek, deferential, and completely avoids anything that slightly sounds like a criticism even if its well deserved.


Prove me wrong. Show me examples where people being super meek and polite get things done and brings justice to criminals, and I'll happly dial my tone down some more.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Advice to younger meditators on jhāna, sex, porn, masturbation

Someone asked: Is porn considered harmful sexual.activity? I don't have a sex life because I don't have a partner and I don't wish to engage in casual sex so I use porn to quench the biological urge to orgasm. I can't see that's it's harmful because nobody is being forced into it. The actors are all paid well and claim to enjoy it etc. The only harm I can see is that it's so accessible these days on smart devices and so children may access it but I believe that this is the parents responsibility to not allow unsupervised use of devices etc. Views? Frankk response: In another thread, you asked about pleasant sensations and jhāna.  I'm guessing you're young, so here's some important advice you won't get from suttas   if you're serious about jhāna.  (since monastics are already celibate by rule)   If you want to attain stable and higher jhānas,   celibacy and noble silence to the best of your ability are the feedstock and prerequiste to tha
Post a Comment
Read more

SN 48.40 Ven. Thanissaro comments on Ven. Sunyo's analysis

This was Ven. Sunyo's analysis of SN 48.40: https://notesonthedhamma.blogspot.com/2024/05/exciting-news-honest-ebt-scholars-like.html And here is Ven. Thanissaro's response to that analysis: I think there’s a better way to tackle the issue of SN 48:40 than by appealing to the oldest layers of commentarial literature. That way is to point out that SN 48:40, as we have it, doesn’t pass the test in DN 16 for determining what’s genuine Dhamma and what’s not. There the standard is, not the authority of the person who’s claiming to report the Buddha’s teachings, but whether the teachings he’s reporting are actually in accordance with the principles of the Dhamma that you know. So the simple fact that those who have passed the Buddha’s teachings down to us say that a particular passage is what the Buddha actually taught is not sufficient grounds for accepting it. In the case of the jhānas—the point at issue here— we have to take as our guide the standard formula for the jhānas, a
Post a Comment
Read more

1min. video: Dalai Lama kissing boy and asking him to suck his tongue

To give more context, this is a public event,  * everyone knows cameras are rolling  *  it's a room full of children * the boy's mom is standing off camera a few feet away watching all of this * the boy initiated contact, he had already had a hug with Dalai Lama earlier and then asked Dalai Lama for another hug which triggered this segment  17 min. video showing what happened before that 1 min. clip and after, with some explanation https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bT0qey5Ts78 16min talk from Ajahn Acalo with his thoughts on Dalai Lama kissing boy, relevance to Bhikkhu monastic code, sexual predators in religion in general, and how celibate monastics deal with sexual energy. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uK2m0TcUib0 The child's comments about the incident in a filmed interview later https://www.marca.com/en/lifestyle/world-news/2023/04/18/643eba5d46163ffc078b457c.html The child: It's a great experience It was amazing to meet His Holiness and I think it's a great ex
Post a Comment
Read more