[TripleGemStudent]

I am appreciative to be able to come across other discerning and wise minds. Thanks to other’s effort, questioning and discussions, recently having gone over and reviewed some of them, I was able to learn much. Some of the things mentioned / shared, myself might not have thought of or discerned. I can say I have truly seen and experienced for myself why Kalana mitta’s are 100% of the path and why it’s advised to associate with the wise.   

 

Recently having gone over the comments here and in the “Salayatana are not sense faculties” thread. I have a few questions for my own clarification purposes. I would like to give thanks in advance to others patience, time and effort in possibly answering or discussing some of the questions or points that might be brought up.  

 

#1 

One of the questions that I would like to have clarified is if “rupakkhanda” is preserved / stored (if the word stored means something similar as preserved) in the namagotta?  

I have seen most recent comments in the discussions that rupakkhanda is preserved in the namagotta. But I have also come across past comments and a PD post that possibly might state otherwise.  

Rupa and Rupakkhandha, Nāma and Nāmagotta

Rupa and rupakkhandha, together with nāma and nāmagotta, help describe two parts of our world: rupa loka and nāma loka. Rupa (forms) are in the rupa loka (material world), and rupakkhandha includes mental images of ALL rupa that we have ever experienced (but not directly preserved.) The four nāma aggregates are preserved in the nāma loka (immaterial or mental world) as nāmagotta.

 

#1A. What does it exactly mean by all rupa that we have ever experienced “not directly preserved”? What’s the difference between not directly preserved and directly preserved? 

Related materials to question #1A

In the Salayatana forum discussion, post #44645 

“Rupakkhanda is not stored, it is generated as needed from other four aggregates” (not Lal words)

Post #44649: 

“Namagotta contains all records of the four mental aggregates” 

Within the same post, it mentions “Rupakkhanda is preserved in the namaloka as namagotta”.

#1B. For clarification purpose, namagotta including the 4 mental aggregates also contains all records of rupakkhanda, is this correct?  

 

#2. 

In post #40386  

It mentions that “namagotta are NOT rupakkhandha”.  

I would agree with the statement that “namagotta are NOT rupakkhanda” but I’m not sure if I have understood completely or properly why “namagotta are NOT rupakkhanda”. The reason why I believe namagotta are not rupakkhanda because namagotta contains more than just rupakkhanda, it also contains the other 4 mental aggregates (belonging to nama category), is this accurate / correct? 

 

#3. 

I believe a question was brought up “why rupakkhandha is not nama? (Since that rupakkhandha is all mental or mental impressions of rupa and not the rupa out there)” 

From one of the PD post, it mentions “The Buddha defined rupa as ALL those that can provide a sensory experience (vinnana)”.  

Could one of the possible reasons why rupakkhanda is not nama because rupakkhanda is what actually initiates the sensory experience (phassa) thereby belonging to the rupa category? 

 

#4. 

Post # 40496, it mentions that “dense rupa (experienced by the five physical senses are localized, but the nama category (vedana, sanna, sankhara, vinnana) is not localized.  

Would rupakkhanda also not be localized?