Disclosing Spiritual ExperiencesWhen and how should a layperson declare their achievements?
Return a String containing only alphabets without spaces
Why not invest in precious metals?
Should I refuse being named as co-author of a bad quality paper?
I have a problematic assistant manager, but I can't fire him
Why are MBA programs closing in the United States?
Printing Pascal’s triangle for n number of rows in Python
How to hide rifle during medieval town entrance inspection?
Who won a Game of Bar Dice?
If I leave the US through an airport, do I have to return through the same airport?
Is it expected that a reader will skip parts of what you write?
What would be the way to say "just saying" in German? (Not the literal translation)
Are polynomials with the same roots identical?
Increase speed altering column on large table to NON NULL
60s or 70s novel about Empire of Man making 1st contact with 1st discovered alien race
Fermat's statement about the ancients: How serious was he?
bash does not know the letter 'p'
How to learn Linux system internals
Draw a line with an isolated and accumulation point in mathbbR
How can I make 12 tone and atonal melodies sound interesting?
Origin of "boor"
New bike, tubeless tire will not inflate
Live action TV show where High school Kids go into the virtual world and have to clear levels
Why can my keyboard only digest 6 keypresses at a time?
Why Does Mama Coco Look Old After Going to the Other World?
Disclosing Spiritual Experiences
When and how should a layperson declare their achievements?
I've read that the Dalai Lama tends not to disclose his own spiritual experiences.
Is it bad to disclose meditative or spiritual experiences as visions and such? Is there a difference between monks and lay practitioners in this respect? Again for monks and lay holders: what occurs if someone is lying or inauthentic about a spiritual experience?
Also, how does one know if a spiritual experience is a genuine one?
Thank you
meditation-recommendation
asked Jun 2 at 11:22
EggmanEggman
2,0831516
add a comment |
I've read that the Dalai Lama tends not to disclose his own spiritual experiences.
Is it bad to disclose meditative or spiritual experiences as visions and such? Is there a difference between monks and lay practitioners in this respect? Again for monks and lay holders: what occurs if someone is lying or inauthentic about a spiritual experience?
Also, how does one know if a spiritual experience is a genuine one?
Thank you
meditation-recommendation
asked Jun 2 at 11:22
EggmanEggman
2,0831516
This may be a duplicate of When and how should a layperson declare their achievements?
– ChrisW♦
Jun 2 at 16:58
add a comment |
I've read that the Dalai Lama tends not to disclose his own spiritual experiences.
Is it bad to disclose meditative or spiritual experiences as visions and such? Is there a difference between monks and lay practitioners in this respect? Again for monks and lay holders: what occurs if someone is lying or inauthentic about a spiritual experience?
Also, how does one know if a spiritual experience is a genuine one?
Thank you
meditation-recommendation
asked Jun 2 at 11:22
EggmanEggman
2,0831516
I've read that the Dalai Lama tends not to disclose his own spiritual experiences.
Is it bad to disclose meditative or spiritual experiences as visions and such? Is there a difference between monks and lay practitioners in this respect? Again for monks and lay holders: what occurs if someone is lying or inauthentic about a spiritual experience?
Also, how does one know if a spiritual experience is a genuine one?
Thank you
meditation-recommendation
meditation-recommendation
asked Jun 2 at 11:22
EggmanEggman
2,0831516
asked Jun 2 at 11:22
EggmanEggman
2,0831516
edited Jun 2 at 11:41
Eggman
asked Jun 2 at 11:22
EggmanEggman
2,0831516
asked Jun 2 at 11:22
EggmanEggman
2,0831516
asked Jun 2 at 11:22
EggmanEggman
2,0831516
2,0831516
This may be a duplicate of When and how should a layperson declare their achievements?
– ChrisW♦
Jun 2 at 16:58
add a comment |
This may be a duplicate of When and how should a layperson declare their achievements?
– ChrisW♦
Jun 2 at 16:58
This may be a duplicate of When and how should a layperson declare their achievements?
– ChrisW♦
Jun 2 at 16:58
This may be a duplicate of When and how should a layperson declare their achievements?
– ChrisW♦
Jun 2 at 16:58
add a comment |
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
From AN8.67, this is ignoble:
Saying you’ve seen, heard, thought, or known something, but you haven’t. And saying you haven’t seen, heard, thought, or known something, and you have
From AN8.68, this is noble:
Saying you haven’t seen, heard, thought, or known something, and you haven’t. And saying you’ve seen, heard, thought, or known something, and you have.
Together, these two considerations create a powerful disincentive to make claims, simply because one might be speaking out of delusion and would therefore be speaking ignoble expressions. Essentially, not saying anything about personal attainments is wisest.
Yet even with this in mind, one might assert a personal experience--how can a listener know the truth of such?
You can get to know a person’s ethics by living with them. But only after a long time, not casually; only when paying attention, not when inattentive; and only by the wise, not the witless.
One comes to know the truth of oneself and others in deeds rather than speech. For more detail, study AN5.100, which discusses the claims of different kinds of teachers including the Buddha himself:
A person will be recognized by their own deeds.
answered Jun 2 at 13:55
OyaMistOyaMist
1,97018
add a comment |
According to the Patimokkha rules:
Should any bhikkhu, without direct knowledge, claim a superior human state, a truly noble knowledge and vision, as present in
himself, saying, "Thus do I know; thus do I see," such that regardless
of whether or not he is cross-examined on a later occasion, he — being
remorseful and desirous of purification — might say, "Friends, not
knowing, I said I know; not seeing, I said I see — vainly, falsely,
idly," unless it was from over-estimation, he also is defeated and no
longer in affiliation.
Should any bhikkhu report (his own) superior human state to an unordained person, when it is factual, it is to be confessed.
The first rule means that monks who deliberately lie about their spiritual achievements to anyone, are defeated (immediate and irreversible expulsion from the monastic order).
The second rule means that monks are not allowed to reveal their spiritual achievements to lay people, even if it is factual.
In addition, for monks and lay people alike, the precept of not telling untruth applies.
answered Jun 2 at 16:39
ruben2020ruben2020
16.4k31244
add a comment |
Your Answer
StackExchange.ready(function()
var channelOptions =
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "565"
;
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function()
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled)
StackExchange.using("snippets", function()
createEditor();
);
else
createEditor();
);
function createEditor()
StackExchange.prepareEditor(
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: false,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: null,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader:
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
,
noCode: true, onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
);
);
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fbuddhism.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f33493%2fdisclosing-spiritual-experiences%23new-answer', 'question_page');
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
From AN8.67, this is ignoble:
Saying you’ve seen, heard, thought, or known something, but you haven’t. And saying you haven’t seen, heard, thought, or known something, and you have
From AN8.68, this is noble:
Saying you haven’t seen, heard, thought, or known something, and you haven’t. And saying you’ve seen, heard, thought, or known something, and you have.
Together, these two considerations create a powerful disincentive to make claims, simply because one might be speaking out of delusion and would therefore be speaking ignoble expressions. Essentially, not saying anything about personal attainments is wisest.
Yet even with this in mind, one might assert a personal experience--how can a listener know the truth of such?
You can get to know a person’s ethics by living with them. But only after a long time, not casually; only when paying attention, not when inattentive; and only by the wise, not the witless.
One comes to know the truth of oneself and others in deeds rather than speech. For more detail, study AN5.100, which discusses the claims of different kinds of teachers including the Buddha himself:
A person will be recognized by their own deeds.
answered Jun 2 at 13:55
OyaMistOyaMist
1,97018
add a comment |
From AN8.67, this is ignoble:
Saying you’ve seen, heard, thought, or known something, but you haven’t. And saying you haven’t seen, heard, thought, or known something, and you have
From AN8.68, this is noble:
Saying you haven’t seen, heard, thought, or known something, and you haven’t. And saying you’ve seen, heard, thought, or known something, and you have.
Together, these two considerations create a powerful disincentive to make claims, simply because one might be speaking out of delusion and would therefore be speaking ignoble expressions. Essentially, not saying anything about personal attainments is wisest.
Yet even with this in mind, one might assert a personal experience--how can a listener know the truth of such?
You can get to know a person’s ethics by living with them. But only after a long time, not casually; only when paying attention, not when inattentive; and only by the wise, not the witless.
One comes to know the truth of oneself and others in deeds rather than speech. For more detail, study AN5.100, which discusses the claims of different kinds of teachers including the Buddha himself:
A person will be recognized by their own deeds.
answered Jun 2 at 13:55
OyaMistOyaMist
1,97018
add a comment |
From AN8.67, this is ignoble:
Saying you’ve seen, heard, thought, or known something, but you haven’t. And saying you haven’t seen, heard, thought, or known something, and you have
From AN8.68, this is noble:
Saying you haven’t seen, heard, thought, or known something, and you haven’t. And saying you’ve seen, heard, thought, or known something, and you have.
Together, these two considerations create a powerful disincentive to make claims, simply because one might be speaking out of delusion and would therefore be speaking ignoble expressions. Essentially, not saying anything about personal attainments is wisest.
Yet even with this in mind, one might assert a personal experience--how can a listener know the truth of such?
You can get to know a person’s ethics by living with them. But only after a long time, not casually; only when paying attention, not when inattentive; and only by the wise, not the witless.
One comes to know the truth of oneself and others in deeds rather than speech. For more detail, study AN5.100, which discusses the claims of different kinds of teachers including the Buddha himself:
A person will be recognized by their own deeds.
answered Jun 2 at 13:55
OyaMistOyaMist
1,97018
From AN8.67, this is ignoble:
Saying you’ve seen, heard, thought, or known something, but you haven’t. And saying you haven’t seen, heard, thought, or known something, and you have
From AN8.68, this is noble:
Saying you haven’t seen, heard, thought, or known something, and you haven’t. And saying you’ve seen, heard, thought, or known something, and you have.
Together, these two considerations create a powerful disincentive to make claims, simply because one might be speaking out of delusion and would therefore be speaking ignoble expressions. Essentially, not saying anything about personal attainments is wisest.
Yet even with this in mind, one might assert a personal experience--how can a listener know the truth of such?
You can get to know a person’s ethics by living with them. But only after a long time, not casually; only when paying attention, not when inattentive; and only by the wise, not the witless.
One comes to know the truth of oneself and others in deeds rather than speech. For more detail, study AN5.100, which discusses the claims of different kinds of teachers including the Buddha himself:
A person will be recognized by their own deeds.
answered Jun 2 at 13:55
OyaMistOyaMist
1,97018
answered Jun 2 at 13:55
OyaMistOyaMist
1,97018
answered Jun 2 at 13:55
OyaMistOyaMist
1,97018
answered Jun 2 at 13:55
OyaMistOyaMist
1,97018
1,97018
add a comment |
add a comment |
According to the Patimokkha rules:
Should any bhikkhu, without direct knowledge, claim a superior human state, a truly noble knowledge and vision, as present in
himself, saying, "Thus do I know; thus do I see," such that regardless
of whether or not he is cross-examined on a later occasion, he — being
remorseful and desirous of purification — might say, "Friends, not
knowing, I said I know; not seeing, I said I see — vainly, falsely,
idly," unless it was from over-estimation, he also is defeated and no
longer in affiliation.
Should any bhikkhu report (his own) superior human state to an unordained person, when it is factual, it is to be confessed.
The first rule means that monks who deliberately lie about their spiritual achievements to anyone, are defeated (immediate and irreversible expulsion from the monastic order).
The second rule means that monks are not allowed to reveal their spiritual achievements to lay people, even if it is factual.
In addition, for monks and lay people alike, the precept of not telling untruth applies.
answered Jun 2 at 16:39
ruben2020ruben2020
16.4k31244
add a comment |
According to the Patimokkha rules:
Should any bhikkhu, without direct knowledge, claim a superior human state, a truly noble knowledge and vision, as present in
himself, saying, "Thus do I know; thus do I see," such that regardless
of whether or not he is cross-examined on a later occasion, he — being
remorseful and desirous of purification — might say, "Friends, not
knowing, I said I know; not seeing, I said I see — vainly, falsely,
idly," unless it was from over-estimation, he also is defeated and no
longer in affiliation.
Should any bhikkhu report (his own) superior human state to an unordained person, when it is factual, it is to be confessed.
The first rule means that monks who deliberately lie about their spiritual achievements to anyone, are defeated (immediate and irreversible expulsion from the monastic order).
The second rule means that monks are not allowed to reveal their spiritual achievements to lay people, even if it is factual.
In addition, for monks and lay people alike, the precept of not telling untruth applies.
answered Jun 2 at 16:39
ruben2020ruben2020
16.4k31244
add a comment |
According to the Patimokkha rules:
Should any bhikkhu, without direct knowledge, claim a superior human state, a truly noble knowledge and vision, as present in
himself, saying, "Thus do I know; thus do I see," such that regardless
of whether or not he is cross-examined on a later occasion, he — being
remorseful and desirous of purification — might say, "Friends, not
knowing, I said I know; not seeing, I said I see — vainly, falsely,
idly," unless it was from over-estimation, he also is defeated and no
longer in affiliation.
Should any bhikkhu report (his own) superior human state to an unordained person, when it is factual, it is to be confessed.
The first rule means that monks who deliberately lie about their spiritual achievements to anyone, are defeated (immediate and irreversible expulsion from the monastic order).
The second rule means that monks are not allowed to reveal their spiritual achievements to lay people, even if it is factual.
In addition, for monks and lay people alike, the precept of not telling untruth applies.
answered Jun 2 at 16:39
ruben2020ruben2020
16.4k31244
According to the Patimokkha rules:
Should any bhikkhu, without direct knowledge, claim a superior human state, a truly noble knowledge and vision, as present in
himself, saying, "Thus do I know; thus do I see," such that regardless
of whether or not he is cross-examined on a later occasion, he — being
remorseful and desirous of purification — might say, "Friends, not
knowing, I said I know; not seeing, I said I see — vainly, falsely,
idly," unless it was from over-estimation, he also is defeated and no
longer in affiliation.
Should any bhikkhu report (his own) superior human state to an unordained person, when it is factual, it is to be confessed.
The first rule means that monks who deliberately lie about their spiritual achievements to anyone, are defeated (immediate and irreversible expulsion from the monastic order).
The second rule means that monks are not allowed to reveal their spiritual achievements to lay people, even if it is factual.
In addition, for monks and lay people alike, the precept of not telling untruth applies.
answered Jun 2 at 16:39
ruben2020ruben2020
16.4k31244
edited Jun 2 at 16:46
answered Jun 2 at 16:39
ruben2020ruben2020
16.4k31244
answered Jun 2 at 16:39
ruben2020ruben2020
16.4k31244
answered Jun 2 at 16:39
ruben2020ruben2020
16.4k31244
16.4k31244
add a comment |
add a comment |
Thanks for contributing an answer to Buddhism Stack Exchange!
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fbuddhism.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f33493%2fdisclosing-spiritual-experiences%23new-answer', 'question_page');
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
This may be a duplicate of When and how should a layperson declare their achievements?
– ChrisW♦
Jun 2 at 16:58