Youse are listening to too many Dhamma talks

In the hearing, there is only the heard. And often there is nobody listening before something in-between two becomes not two and one more penny drops. And as ashamed I might feel for being so dimwitted that I still find dhamma talks well worth spending my time on, they at least keep me from doing something even more stupid, robbing banks or molesting that driver who just cut me off in traffic :innocent:

And to Bhante, I like to say welcome as an older and maybe grumpier monk, who now regards things as being better or more genuine when times were not so easy. What would those older than Bhante say? Maybe they could smile and remember when they were younger and didn’t even have a floor to sit on, but were all monks had to pile up on one single spike, because a spike to each would be regarded as indulging in pleasure … :metal:

6 Likes

Ok! Listen to as many talks as you want! :laughing::joy: Buuuut we should make sure we listen with wise attention, yoniso manasikāra.

There are two conditions for the arising of right view.
“Dveme, bhikkhave, paccayā sammādiṭṭhiyā uppādāya.
What two?
Katame dve?
The words of another and proper attention.
Parato ca ghoso, yoniso ca manasikāro.
These are the two conditions for the arising of right view.”
Ime kho, bhikkhave, dve paccayā sammādiṭṭhiyā uppādāyā”ti.
(AN2.126)

Essentially, listening to the Dhamma should be opportunity to tune in rather than tune out.

11 Likes

Bhante says something about listening to silence, and that I believe is a wise suggestion, but that also leaves me with the question: Where is silence to be found? I haven’t found silence anywhere/anyhow … There is always some sounds wherever I turn my attention, and when I plug my ears, there is silence for maybe a second, or until awareness picks up the sound of breathing, heartbeat or the “sound of silence” in the mind.
But if one forget ears, and use the eyes and have a closer look, one can see silence everywhere. And that leads the attention to retract it’s steps back to the source of consciousness behind noise. There one finds perfect silence, undisturbed regardless if one goes to a heavy metal concert, or listening to a peaceful Dhamma talk.
One doesn’t have to listen to silence if one is silence itself.

5 Likes

Tune in, turn on turn off, drop out? :sweat_smile: :joy:

1 Like

In many cases I guess the choice is: Which upadana shall it be today? Phone-content, a dhamma-talk, silence, distraction? Or maybe a dhamma-talk on the phone, or silently staring at the switched-off screen? And who can tell what is the best choice in the end? When does it get ‘really’ deep?

3 Likes

Yes and no. I feel like I’ve met people who “know” a lot of dhamma, have memorized many words, have great recall abilities but when you really discuss with them they haven’t absorbed it very deeply–aren’t applying it to their daily lives or reaping the benefits of careful observation and mindful attention.

And I know people who know very few Suttas but take the few dhamma talks or teachings they’ve heard and let it sink much further in.

I would argue that there’s harm in repetitive low-attention exposure, that you could habituate to hearing dhamma such that it doesn’t even sink in anymore. Just background noise.

10 Likes

Of course people like that exist. And of course they should be applying it to their lives. But telling them to listen to fewer talks doesn’t do a single thing to solve the real problem.

That’s my issue with this whole argument. It is creating, in my opinion, a strawperson/caricature.

Having “heard much” was constantly praised by the Buddha. As was applying the teachings to our lives. They are in no way mutually exclusive.

On a personal level, I feel very lucky to be around people who are constantly listening to talks because I know I can ask them questions and get answers. Obviously it would be nice if they practiced the teachings too, weren’t arrogant, etc, etc. But I’m glad to have them in my life regardless. And who am I to judge what they have or haven’t absorbed?

13 Likes

Or you can harm your practice by concentrated/high attention listening in a way that you learn the dhamma in a mechanical way, aka; further conditioning the mind.

The art of listening is not easy.

4 Likes

(Youse have made this my first ‘Nice Reply’ badge-worthy post. Sadly, it didn’t really help move the conversation forward. But next time I will. Have a fine day.)

6 Likes

There are only so many hours in a day. One fewer hour passive engagement can free up one hour for practice.

If such people are kalayana mitta perhaps you have an invitation to discuss each of your approach to practice and right view?

If they are just acquaintances it makes sense to say nothing.

In one of my recent listenings, there was a certain Ajahn saying something very useful regarding Sangha, and which landed nicely in my reality and practice. As years go by and one naturally is getting closer to the stillness of being, one experiences that the distance back to the so-called real world increases, which in my world means losing interest in keeping up with friends and relatives, resulting in that one find oneself being mostly alone in this world. This aloneness isn’t bothering me much, but there is still a certain need for other points of view or just a friendly sounding voice apart from my own, and all of these different teachers one brings along becomes an internal Sangha of my own making.

If you don’t have a Sangha, then make one!

And to @Sujato, we haven’t been together in jungles or sat on the same floor, but believe me when I say that we have been together here a couple of years ago, and there is nothing you can do about it … :v:
:pray:

7 Likes

I would say, it does work and could help some. I have experimented with this myself. Kind of like substance substitution. Or, not dissimilar from exchanging coarser attachments to finer ones as in meditation exercises in some sense. Or worldly to non-worldly. I used to, and still do, call this Dhammatainment.

PS. On a semi-related note. Although rather far from EBT, there was a now expired website called http://www.dharmaflix.com/ that had movies covering different angles of Dharma in the broadest sense (I chose the Sanskrit version of the word knowingly, as everything from reincarnation to bardo to the vedas was covered). I was able to get an old 2012 version load today via archive.org here.

5 Likes

Ooh, that’s a cool site, thanks. And yeah, substance substitution works. A senior monk at Amaravati suggested that I do this, actually. Went to him fully expecting him to explain about letting go or whatever, but no. Got much better advice.

2 Likes

This must be right! It has math! :smile:

Anecdotally, this thread does remind me that I can remember specific stories, answers, and facial expressions from live Seung Sahn talks I went to in the 80’s and live John Daido Loori talks in the 90’s. I can’t even remember what talks I’ve listened to over the last couple months. :thinking:

Edit: Though I don’t actually listen to that many talks, so on second thought this might be more a commentary on age than on live talks vs talks given on all that new-fangled stuff - YouTube, Zoom, Roomba, etc.

2 Likes

Dubious Australian second-person plural pronoun “youse”…obscure and difficult…Jayatillake Early Buddhist Theory of Knowledge.

:exploding_head:

1 Like

Well, I hadn’t actually realized that “youse” was an Australian thing. Second person plurals are definitely a big lack in formal English. “Youse” is very much a thing around Dublin (and I think also in places in Northern England like Liverpool and Manchester). In the rest of Ireland, “ye” (rhyming with “we”) is very common in everyday speech (what I would often speak, though not write).

1 Like

And New Zealand… :rofl:
Well, the Americans have Y’all… We can’t be left out…

2 Likes

Thanks to rap music, the Southern US & African-American “y’all” seems to be on an unstoppable march to world hegemony. It’s now even got its own Wikipedia entry.

Sadly the same can’t be said for the Yorkshire Dales solution to the problem, which is now rapidly on the wane. When I was growing up there, the pronoun ‘you’ could only be plural and for the singular we still used ‘thou’, though pronouncing it /ðɑː/ and inflecting it:

nominative: thaa, tha or ta
accusative & possessive: thee
reflexive: theessen

The verb, however, takes the third person singular form rather than the traditional thou forms: “thaa says”, not “thaa sayest”.

Here’s the Dales dialect explained to Aussies in rhyming verse…

9 Likes

This is a false dichotomy. Listening casually to Dhamma throughout the day doesn’t negate the occasions that the listener sits down to concentrate on a really good deep talk.

What’s best for a person depends upon many factors. Ultimately the standard of the Buddha is whether the effect is wholesome or unwholesome.

If in the absence of numerous semi-background Dhamma talks one is living in delightful quietude, very good. That’s not most people most of the time.

When grief is pressing, loneliness, worry over many concerns, illness, despair, [edit remorse, temptations] and other painful states, then a lot of silence can give room to develop worsened mental srates --> not skillful for them at that time. Living accompanied by sounds that help push aside trains of thought can offer a balm to the fevered mind. Even the mere background chatter of Dhamma talks would give a flow of wholesome words, uplifting intonations - a general good influence washing over the person. Sometimes the listener will tune in right when the very message they need to hear is being spoken, bringing great benefit.

You’d prefer that your students who are in pain fill the silence with what, singers like Sade? Taylor Swift? BTS? Or, the endlessly available worldly podcasts and funny videos?

I think it’s important not to shame people who are doing what’s currently most wholesome for them.

(Formatting edits, added to unwholesome states)

40 Likes

Is this really true? That there are some people that listen to a lot of talks, sure. But that not only are there so many people mainlineing (whatever that would mean in this context) and also don’t know much? I have to respectfully disagree.

I also don’t think that lay people can necessarily replicate the monastic environment where not only would the person giving the talk be able to tailor it to the listeners, but the whole environment of living together in a monastery means that you are constantly mainlining wholesome Dhammas in a very passive way. So frequent, potentially passive listening to Dhamma talks may offer an alternative skillful environment.

Indeed.

Moreover, even if someone doesn’t remember everything they have heard, or even begun to understand what they are hearing, at some later point they may have a recollection about a certain topic, or story, or situation that would be helpful to them at that point and then be able to go back an re-listen with more attention.

Indeed. Best not to judge others. I think the Buddha said that, eh?

8 Likes