I have really enjoyed both Innovative Teacher articles.
Even if I don't have the time and space in my life to explore them all, it's very interesting and encouraging to know they're out there. These articles represent many years of you filtering through massive amounts of information. So thanks for sharing with us.
Some random thoughts from your Daniel Ingram piece:
Warning, I don't know any more about him than what you've written here (but will do some further reading for sure).
The mention of autism is very interesting to me. He seems like an almost shamanic figure. If you look at some of the features presented by autism, they sort of line up with what you'd expect from a shaman. Living outside the culture, next level knowledge about something very particular, unique sensory processing, and probably a few more :)
Maybe you could expand on this, because I don't know: have there been as many reformers in Buddhism as say Christianity? Has there ever been a Buddhist reformation or Vatican 2.0? If not, any theories as to why?
This is connected with your point about debate. When someone is fully set into a belief system (or you could even call it an architype) they are not interested in healthy debate. As you suggest, they show hostility toward other views which serves to strengthen their belief. Their anger hides their vulnerability. Like a cognitive bias.
Would it be somewhat the case that claiming to be an arhant is like claiming divinity? I can see people in the west having a difficult time understanding that concept, but wouldn't people in the east understand the claim quite differently? Do we as humans ultimately need devine or transcendent role models? We almost need to strive towards the impossible. I can see arguments from both sides. Point taken that it might be traditionalists who struggle with it the most. A lot of complex emotions involved for them. Moving past the guru model seems connected here too. Maybe the issue is that we only divinize people who have been long dead :) We can then idealize them.
You mention the value of body awareness for us westerners. Is that basically the same thing as the Mahasi method? I guess this is connected with your interest in a Goenka retreat?
I like the comment from Daniel about focusing more on practice and less on psychology (or other potential distractions). I could use that advice :)
The innovate teachers hit a sweet spot for me because:
-I survived an evangelical Christian upbringing, with years of subsequent deprogramming, so I'm leery of belief systems, dogma, etc. So I love how Shinzen is mystical or Daniel is pragmatic.
-I struggle with languages such as Pali/Sanskrit, so Shinzen and Daniel are both refreshing that way.
-I can't escape that fact that I'm a westerner (the way I escaped my upbringing), despite my concerns with the west, so bridging the best of the east and the west seems necessary for me to grow.
Jude you're so niche! Thanks for creating this space :) I hope it continues to grow :)
I have really enjoyed both Innovative Teacher articles.
Even if I don't have the time and space in my life to explore them all, it's very interesting and encouraging to know they're out there. These articles represent many years of you filtering through massive amounts of information. So thanks for sharing with us.
Some random thoughts from your Daniel Ingram piece:
Warning, I don't know any more about him than what you've written here (but will do some further reading for sure).
The mention of autism is very interesting to me. He seems like an almost shamanic figure. If you look at some of the features presented by autism, they sort of line up with what you'd expect from a shaman. Living outside the culture, next level knowledge about something very particular, unique sensory processing, and probably a few more :)
Maybe you could expand on this, because I don't know: have there been as many reformers in Buddhism as say Christianity? Has there ever been a Buddhist reformation or Vatican 2.0? If not, any theories as to why?
This is connected with your point about debate. When someone is fully set into a belief system (or you could even call it an architype) they are not interested in healthy debate. As you suggest, they show hostility toward other views which serves to strengthen their belief. Their anger hides their vulnerability. Like a cognitive bias.
Would it be somewhat the case that claiming to be an arhant is like claiming divinity? I can see people in the west having a difficult time understanding that concept, but wouldn't people in the east understand the claim quite differently? Do we as humans ultimately need devine or transcendent role models? We almost need to strive towards the impossible. I can see arguments from both sides. Point taken that it might be traditionalists who struggle with it the most. A lot of complex emotions involved for them. Moving past the guru model seems connected here too. Maybe the issue is that we only divinize people who have been long dead :) We can then idealize them.
You mention the value of body awareness for us westerners. Is that basically the same thing as the Mahasi method? I guess this is connected with your interest in a Goenka retreat?
I like the comment from Daniel about focusing more on practice and less on psychology (or other potential distractions). I could use that advice :)
The innovate teachers hit a sweet spot for me because:
-I survived an evangelical Christian upbringing, with years of subsequent deprogramming, so I'm leery of belief systems, dogma, etc. So I love how Shinzen is mystical or Daniel is pragmatic.
-I struggle with languages such as Pali/Sanskrit, so Shinzen and Daniel are both refreshing that way.
-I can't escape that fact that I'm a westerner (the way I escaped my upbringing), despite my concerns with the west, so bridging the best of the east and the west seems necessary for me to grow.
Jude you're so niche! Thanks for creating this space :) I hope it continues to grow :)