Suan Mokkh is going through some changes. There has been a mini Thai takeover. The English monk who had been teaching there for 20 years or so has been forced out. He has been replaced by a Thai Tai Chi instructor, who also leads the Yoga exercise in the morning. I had heard that the reason for this may have been the English monk's irreverence, with regard to some older (and well respected) Thai teachers.
Instead of a talking human, the Tai Chi instructor plays CDs of the Venerable Ajahn Budadhasa, the original founder of Suan Mokkh.
This is dreadfully boring.
The Tai Chi instructor also inflicts "guided meditation" on the group, where he repeats "just breathe" or "breathe in, and breathe out" again and again, throughout the meditation period.
Last year, the Tai Chi guy had just shown up when I came in for a 10 day retreat with a friend of mine. At the time, he was just a volunteer, who had offered his "guided meditation" period.
Leaving the retreat back then, I had a bad feeling. I told my friend that the Tai Chi guy was exactly the type of character you see taking control of monasteries. For me it was a bad feeling because I was surprised that someone would think repeating "juuuust breathe" again and again, every couple of minutes, through a silent meditation period would be beneficial to anyone.
Anyway, a year later and there he is, running the place.
He sells his Tai Chi CDs on the side.
But I like Suan Mokkh. I have always liked the place.
I have been to Suan Mokkh and Dippapavan (a sister monastery on Koh Samuii) maybe 15 times, for 10 day or 7 day retreats. I like it here, because it is set up for foreigners, and in Thailand, that means travelers. To me, there is something very pure about sitting with travelers. It is something I prefer over entering a monastery full of longtime monks.
I prefer it because travelers are, by nature, free. They enjoy none of the societal status or privileges that monks enjoy. They are exploring, testing. They are open-minded. They have no ulterior motives. They are there only because they wish to sit.
The truth is, for a lot of monks, in a lot of centers, that is not the case. For many, if they had some more money, they would be off gambling in Macau (I'm not talking particularly about Thai monks).
Something about the teaching at Suan Mokkh...
The monastery's founder, the Venerable Ajahn Buddhadasa (this is the way he is referred to, in all printed material) states, in his teachings, that it is beyond the capability of humans to understand the root of consciousness.
His monks, of course, repeat this claim.
If they didn't, they wouldn't be his monks.
As is the case in all monasteries throughout time, this is a problem, because, once you have a "teacher" who has not come to real insight, he or she will offer an interpretation of Buddhist thought, and he will do so from a viewpoint that is very different from someone with insight.
So, to these teachers, "dependent origination" means a scientific law of nature (unspecified) to be discovered through deep meditation, though having no relation to "mind".
The ideas "Impermanence" and "not-self" means (as you often hear) nothing stays the same forever.
A person who has dropped to the root --even once -- would have a very different definition of these things.
There is no way to "prove" things, in these cases. It would be nice if things were otherwise, but a differing view is sneered at, or ridiculed. That means a person with real insight (at least a glimpse) is going to be sneered at, or ridiculed, unless he or she stays quiet.
Generations pass, this way. People "learn" a concept in one day, from a teacher they respect, and they will defend it to the day they die. It is a common thing, and you would be surprised at how readily new students accept the teachers at their word. After one dharma talk, they believe, completely, that it is impossible to dig to the root of consciousness. So it just goes on and on.
That is too bad, because teachers like those at Suan Mokkh have taken the question away, and the question is the only thing that will lead anyone to the answer.
If a teacher says "nobody knows...." you know two things:
That is not a good thing.
Instead of a talking human, the Tai Chi instructor plays CDs of the Venerable Ajahn Budadhasa, the original founder of Suan Mokkh.
This is dreadfully boring.
The Tai Chi instructor also inflicts "guided meditation" on the group, where he repeats "just breathe" or "breathe in, and breathe out" again and again, throughout the meditation period.
Last year, the Tai Chi guy had just shown up when I came in for a 10 day retreat with a friend of mine. At the time, he was just a volunteer, who had offered his "guided meditation" period.
Leaving the retreat back then, I had a bad feeling. I told my friend that the Tai Chi guy was exactly the type of character you see taking control of monasteries. For me it was a bad feeling because I was surprised that someone would think repeating "juuuust breathe" again and again, every couple of minutes, through a silent meditation period would be beneficial to anyone.
Anyway, a year later and there he is, running the place.
He sells his Tai Chi CDs on the side.
But I like Suan Mokkh. I have always liked the place.
I have been to Suan Mokkh and Dippapavan (a sister monastery on Koh Samuii) maybe 15 times, for 10 day or 7 day retreats. I like it here, because it is set up for foreigners, and in Thailand, that means travelers. To me, there is something very pure about sitting with travelers. It is something I prefer over entering a monastery full of longtime monks.
I prefer it because travelers are, by nature, free. They enjoy none of the societal status or privileges that monks enjoy. They are exploring, testing. They are open-minded. They have no ulterior motives. They are there only because they wish to sit.
The truth is, for a lot of monks, in a lot of centers, that is not the case. For many, if they had some more money, they would be off gambling in Macau (I'm not talking particularly about Thai monks).
Something about the teaching at Suan Mokkh...
The monastery's founder, the Venerable Ajahn Buddhadasa (this is the way he is referred to, in all printed material) states, in his teachings, that it is beyond the capability of humans to understand the root of consciousness.
His monks, of course, repeat this claim.
If they didn't, they wouldn't be his monks.
As is the case in all monasteries throughout time, this is a problem, because, once you have a "teacher" who has not come to real insight, he or she will offer an interpretation of Buddhist thought, and he will do so from a viewpoint that is very different from someone with insight.
So, to these teachers, "dependent origination" means a scientific law of nature (unspecified) to be discovered through deep meditation, though having no relation to "mind".
The ideas "Impermanence" and "not-self" means (as you often hear) nothing stays the same forever.
A person who has dropped to the root --even once -- would have a very different definition of these things.
There is no way to "prove" things, in these cases. It would be nice if things were otherwise, but a differing view is sneered at, or ridiculed. That means a person with real insight (at least a glimpse) is going to be sneered at, or ridiculed, unless he or she stays quiet.
Generations pass, this way. People "learn" a concept in one day, from a teacher they respect, and they will defend it to the day they die. It is a common thing, and you would be surprised at how readily new students accept the teachers at their word. After one dharma talk, they believe, completely, that it is impossible to dig to the root of consciousness. So it just goes on and on.
That is too bad, because teachers like those at Suan Mokkh have taken the question away, and the question is the only thing that will lead anyone to the answer.
If a teacher says "nobody knows...." you know two things:
- The teacher doesn't know, and
- The teacher is the type of person who, because he or she doesn't know, claims that nobody knows.
That is not a good thing.
"So, to these teachers, "dependent origination" means a scientific law of nature (unspecified) to be discovered through deep meditation, though having no relation to "mind".
ReplyDeleteYou have a lot of good insights, but the above quote is not correct, I am afraid. In a number of books, Tan Buddhadasa mentions that as Buddha said: Balutham or true enlightenment can be reached in several ways: Via deep meditation, via guidance from a master/teacher or via self study. It all depends on the person's capacity for learning.
I don't know who you are or how to contact you. But it would perhaps be interesting to further this discussion next time you happen to come to Chaiya.
J