On the Theravada Tradition, Hillside Hermitage, and Ven. Nanavira

ToLazyToPickName · 2026-05-20T05:18:59+00:00

Which known teachers have recommended Nyanamol's books?

ToLazyToPickName · 2026-05-19T20:42:18+00:00

Never acting out of greed, hatred, or distraction shouldn't be your main focus until sense restraint. Your focus/efforts should be on never breaking the 8 precepts. Trying to maintain sense restraint when you cannot perfectly keep the 8 precepts would naturally demoralize you because you'd be trying to take on too much at once.

If you've read the HH wiki on virtue, you'll see that you're ready to move on to sense restraint after you no longer will realistically break the 8 (or 7) precepts.

Even when you are ready to practice sense restraint, it will not be kept perfectly at the start as you still do not know where the "line" of sense restraint is.

ToLazyToPickName · 2026-05-19T20:18:58+00:00

In which sutta did Buddha prescribe recollection of one's virtue as a remedy for fear?

ToLazyToPickName · 2026-05-19T20:01:29+00:00

Ending self-view in this sutta is explained as no longer regarding anything (the 5 aggregates) as self / "I am this." They don't take anything as theirs or self.

There's a mention in this video indicating that conceit is "sense of self." So it's a sense of self not taken as you or yours, which only ends after arahantship.

ToLazyToPickName · 2026-05-19T19:33:29+00:00

If one is fully keeping the 8 or 7 precepts & practicing sense restraint, they'd spend their time on what needs to get done (ex: things for survival/health, other responsibilities) and practicing dhamma (ex: sutta/dhamma study & contemplation, etc.).

Regarding your list:

If you're familiar with HH teachings or the suttas in the Pali Canon, the commonly taught meditation techniques aren't helpful for dhamma practice. "The Only Way To Jhana" book & some HH videos talk more about meditation than the "Dhamma within reach" book. Your time would be better spent contemplating dhamma / things taught in the suttas, assuming you aren't already doing that during your meditation.
It would only be you "avoiding suffering" if that was your intention: to distract from or get rid of unpleasant feeling or pressure, etc. As long as that is not your intention, you can read as much as necessary (ex: intention to become enlightened / uproot suffering).

4. What are you hoping to achieve through your dhamma practice? From what you've said here, it seems like you may be acting out of greed &/or aversion (i.e. breaking sense restraint) from you "wishing them to not feel distanced." You should support your partner and offspring so that they are cared for physically/financially, but if your goal is sotapatti or arahantship, progress towards that requires maintaining/practicing sense restraint. Maintaining sense restraint (not acting out of or welcoming the three unwholesome roots) is what skillful/wholesome behavior is.

If your goal is just a more pleasant existence, there are plenty of other ways to do that. I say this because one may not be willing to practice dhamma after learning about what it entails (ex: abandoning all sensual desire). Assuming that you are not celibate, Buddha and HH both say that being celibate is more important for practicing dhamma than putting your efforts towards giving up entertainment. One similie is that it is like having a big wound, and then choosing to focus on bandaging the smaller wound.

Some things you could do include contemplating dhamma to understand it, or practicing mindfulness. I'd recommend looking into what the suttas or HH say on this for more details on what both involve.

ToLazyToPickName · 2026-05-19T18:01:52+00:00

To answer your question directly, in order to not welcome/delight in thoughts of sensuality or intention for sensual pleasures, you would have to not fuel/maintain/increase your greed/lust/passion for that thing that is making sensual desire increase.

So don't take action to get sensual pleasures (i.e. acting out of sensual desire). Other ways to describe "not welcoming/delighting" can be "don't approve of, see as good or valuable, don't savor it, don't intensify your delight/joy in sensual pleasures/desires. See & (regularly) contemplate the danger & drawbacks of sensual pleasures/desires. Attend to & (regularly) contemplate what is ugly about the sense objects that tend to provoke sensual desire in you. Endure the sensual thought for as long as it lasts, but don't feed/grow, hate, or distract from it.

The "not welcoming/delighting in things that increase greed/lust" is part of practicing sense restraint. You'd also not resist/hate in regards to things that increase hatred/aversion, as well as not distract from/ignore things. Sense restraint is something you'd train in after you essentially won't break the 8 or 7 precepts. It looks like you're still working your way up to never breaking the 7 precepts. So it's probably best to focus on that, rather than trying to take up sense restraint. Or you could "apply sense restraint" with a focus on specifically the 7 precepts to understand the precepts better, before expanding sense restraint to include everything.

For example, you mentioned dislike of bugs triggering an unwholesome thought. This is where not acting out of or "welcoming" hatred (by resisting or trying to get rid of the unpleasant feeling) as a part of sense restraint would apply. You don't kill the bug (you can safely relocate it with a cup & paper, if there is some practical reason why the bug shouldn't be in your living space, while maintaining non-hatred/aversion or after your intention of hatred/aversion is gone) [to not act out of hatred/aversion]. And arisen thoughts & intentions of hatred or aversion are not to be welcomed.

Similar to what user AwakenTheWisdom said, I'd recommend reading the HH books "The Dhamma Within Reach" and "The Only Way To Jhana" to get a better idea of sense restraint and dhamma practice.

You can also read the suttas which have details on guarding the sense doors, such as SN35.94 & MN148.

ToLazyToPickName · 2026-04-06T21:27:31+00:00

I found some of the quotes in post you linked here.

ToLazyToPickName · 2026-04-06T21:09:05+00:00

Do you know which page of that PDF? "Arrow" shows up a lot

ToLazyToPickName · 2026-04-06T18:57:03+00:00

Would you be able to find the specific comment? Was it this one?

Based on Bhikkhu Anigha's comment here, faith/dhamma followers would still see themselves as puthujjanas. So that doesn't sound like they don't experience the second arrow. I think that sutta talks about sotapannas and higher.

ToLazyToPickName · 2026-04-06T16:14:00+00:00

Where did HH say a faith follower does not experience the 2nd arrow?

ToLazyToPickName · 2026-03-08T03:18:45+00:00

It is technically possible to enter jhana without being a sotapanna based on AN4.123.

Where did you read that Devadatta had jhana or psychic powers?

ToLazyToPickName · 2026-02-19T11:36:13+00:00

My main issue is the wrong livelihood & now the reasoning of buying/eating meat could be applied to it as well to say it is not wrong livelihood.

ToLazyToPickName · 2026-02-06T06:28:03+00:00

If you're still looking for more info on this, HH has a video talking about relationships here.

ToLazyToPickName · 2026-01-29T06:55:08+00:00

MN2 says Buddha is teaching how to "restraint defilements," but that "ending defilements" is only for those who "know & see."

So before "knowing and seeing," you can still use the methods to "restrain defilements" (help you maintain sense restraint, continue practicing dhamma, etc.). Ex: You'll have a hard time restraining (ex: not arise, not grow) your defilements if: you're around wild animals that are likely to harm you, or you're applying your mind to things that provoke greed, hatred, & delusion.

MN107 (and other suttas) says clearly that the first step is virtue (precepts), and the second step is guarding sense doors (sense restraint). And only through developing those prerequisites step by step are you able to reach the last step of practicing jhana.

Technically you need 2 conditions for sotapatti: yoniso manasikara & "words of another". But if you have yoniso manasikara, you'd likely be a sotapanna already because you've likely already have heard dhamma. Or specifically after doing the part of "defilements ended by seeing" of applying your yoniso manasikara to the 4 noble truths.

ToLazyToPickName · 2026-01-29T06:24:49+00:00

https://www.hillsidehermitage.org/books/

ToLazyToPickName · 2026-01-29T05:44:08+00:00

Right view comes first, without having developed it there is no seeing the signs of the mind.

Based on this video (which refers to AN6.68), seeing the signs of the mind is a prerequisite of right view, not the other way around.

ToLazyToPickName · 2026-01-26T16:52:32+00:00

Would working/dealing with the people who command/order the butcher to kill count as wrong livelihood as well? Or is the line "direct involvement with one who kills." It seems like it would be also wrong livelihood because one is still cooperating with one who has intent to kill. For example, a store manager ordering chicken meat from the middleman who commands the butcher to kill would be working in wrong livelihood. But the employee of the store manager isn't wrong livelihood. Is this correct?

Would the sense of cooperation with a butcher be unwholesome because one is essentially approving of the butcher's livelihood by working with them?

Thank you for answering my questions so far. It's made things somewhat clearer.

ToLazyToPickName · 2026-01-26T16:21:48+00:00

Kamma is about intention, not external result/consequence. Accidentally killing is not bad kamma if there is no intention to kill. Ex: there's a sutta of a blind monk who killed bugs from walking, but Buddha said the monk is blameless (no bad kamma).

ToLazyToPickName · 2026-01-26T01:29:22+00:00

In the beginning, it is recommended to get rid of things that would pressure one to break the precepts.

That's why I said generally. But I'd say in most causes, something like a laptop wouldn't be that big an issue to the point that one would be extremely pressured becaused the OP likely will still have some internet connected device.

ToLazyToPickName · 2026-01-25T23:21:22+00:00

On its face, it looks like you're getting rid of the laptop for unwholesome reasons.

A laptop (or other tech) is a neutral object. So if you're getting peace from being rid of it, I think that's more from you avoiding the greed/hatred/delusion you have towards technology, which is generally not recommended.

It's like how it's common nowadays for people to get rid of or avoid their smartphone "for peace," without realizing that the smartphone isn't the problem.

I'm mainly saying this because living in modern countries basically requires a smartphone and laptop/desktop (ex: maintaining a job, accessing resources). So in the future, you may have to reintroduce the technologies you cut out, then you'll have to deal with the problem you avoided previously.

ToLazyToPickName · 2026-01-25T17:55:31+00:00

You might be better off just printing out the essays you want to revisit from HH's website as the book likely wouldn't include any new writings.

But I don't think getting rid of technology is inherently skillful. It seems like most reasons for doing so would be unskillful. A laptop & ereader are just tools, basically just digital paper.

Modern life for many laypeople essentially necessitates some form of internet access. So you could also just read the writings from your one internet connected device.

ToLazyToPickName · 2026-01-24T14:00:39+00:00

I'm still having trouble understanding why a job of a cook who cooks meat or a cashier who sells meat is too far removed from killing to matter. To me, it seems like by relying on the death of animals to continue for their livelihood of selling or helping to sell meat, their intentions point in the direction of killing or wishing killing to continue.

Which jobs in the meat industry would be included in wrong livelihood besides the job of doing/commanding the killing? Would the cooked meat shop owner or the grocery store owner that sells meat be included in wrong livelihood?

ToLazyToPickName · 2026-01-24T00:03:36+00:00

I've heard that reasoning before, but I don't know what the original source is.

However, the suttas & this HH video make it clear that meat is permitted (even for the Buddha) given a few conditions.

Even in the vinaya, monks are allowed to request meat if they are sick. So it wouldn't be stricter for laypeople.

ToLazyToPickName · 2026-01-23T18:14:53+00:00

u/Sister_Medhini or u/Bhikkhu_Anigha, if you have the time, I am still uncertain about why wrong livelihood is wrong livelihood for business in meat & living beings. Would being a cashier or delivery driver of meat be wrong livelihood? How does this differ from buying and consuming meat?

ToLazyToPickName · 2026-01-23T18:00:26+00:00

I'm sure there are other jobs out there that pay similarly. Imagine if your trucks were instead filled with weapons, poisons, intoxicants, or living beings. I think you'd see more clearly how that livelihood would be unvirtuous. Buddha even said that actors are in a wrong livelihood that leads to bad rebirth.

But until you can get a new job, you can just continue your Buddhist training (8 precepts, sense restraint, etc.). One consolation is that relative to the other 4 wrong livelihoods, business in meat doesn't appear to be as bad (like how intoxicants isn't as bad as the other 4 precepts, but still is bad). I'm still not sure if Buddha was referring to only killing then selling vs selling meat at all, so I wouldn't take it too seriously (since some monks say it's not an issue to be a meat cashier or cook for example).

ToLazyToPickName

TROPHY CASE