- This topic has 10 replies, 6 voices, and was last updated 3 months ago by
.
-
Posts
-
-
Hi Lal and everybody. I have been carefully reading some sections. I’ve got some questions, especially regarding the meditation and PS sections. But I would like to learn from the beginning how to interpret the Tipitaka, the Sutta Interpretation section.
First of all I want to clarify that English is not my first language, and I wrote quite directly and straight. Please, pardon me if I sound mad, it is not my intention. Best love for the Buddha, the Dhamma, the Sangha, and all puredhamma friends.
# How the teaching were lost?
I am aware that in different spiritual schools, the texts of the teachings are composed in a way that different layers of meaning arise from reading such texts.
One who is not from the school will get a superficial layer, usually quite meaningless. An initiated, into the school, will get the superficial layer and also a more meaningful layer. For one who has mastered all the teaching of the school, will get the previous two layer plus another layer much more deep. Unless one has previous knowledge, experience, expertise, in such School, the texts won’t reveal anything really useful.
The main reason this is done, is to keep the powerful and meaningful teachings of one tradition secret from the profane. Even if the teachings were to be heard or read by a profane, this profane would not get much benefit from them.
This rational is easy to understand.However,
1) Buddha’s intention was to deliver everything one needs to attain Nibbana to anyone. He would not teach the higher teaching to people who were not ready for them – it’d be a loss of time for both parties. Yet, Buddha declared that he shared with the Sangha all that he knew relevant to getting to the further shore. So, the Sangha got the full teachings, the texts, the keys to interpret the texts, and their meanings.
2) Buddha was very aware that his teachings will degrade quite fast in this world. He was weary and put attention in the way he composed, teach, and advise the bhikkhus how they should teach and preserve the Dhamma.From “Sutta Interpretation – Uddēsa, Niddēsa, Paṭiniddēsa“:
Thus suttā were composed so that only the “conventional” meaning was apparent. That was necessary to preserve the suttā, especially before writing became commonplace.
I do not understand this at all. I understand that some words said by the Buddha may convey one, two, or more meanings. I understand that in order to fully interpret the Suttas, one should be aware of that. The reason for doing that, as you also pointed it, is to make the teaching much more compact, easy to memorize, easy to recite. That said, I do not see how that was necessary.
The Buddha synthesized each sutta in a “double meaning” way for them to survive the “dark periods.” That part is my theory, and I believe it will be proven accurate.
How doing this would help, prevent, or affect the survival of the Suttas and teachings, during dark or light periods? I do not understand it.
Now,
If the Tipitaka we have today is quite similar to the one recited in the first council, then it is clear that it has been preserved even during “dark periods”. Therefore, one cannot but ask: why the keys to interpret the meaning of the Tipitaka were not lay down into the Tipitaka. They would have been preserved as well!
I find it hard to believe what you said. How is that compatible with the fact that
A) The baskets of suttas are extremely long. Yes, it has a lot of repetition, so it is not a text “dense” in information, but the explanation of the keys would not make it any harder to preserve.
B) The Abhidhamma is even longer. Again, the explanation of the keys would not make it any harder or larger to preserve – and the whole purpose of the Abhidhamma is to make sure that the interpretation of the Suttas would not get lost.
C) The commentaries are also long. (I have read some translation of Paṭisambhidāmagga, and I only found conventional/breath meanings).
D) In those days people were used to memorize text that were large and more complicated and denser than the Suttas, like the Vedas. The Vedas were carried along the Vedangas: phonetics, grammar, meters, etymology, astrology, and description of the rituals… to make sure that not only the Vedas were preserved, but also the keys to understand the preserved Vedas. Therefore, the tipitaka could have carried grammar, etymology, phonetics, and descriptions of meditation practises.
E) You wrote “It is an offense (pārājika) to misinterpret suttā (and dhamma concepts in general.) That is in several suttā in the “Bālavagga of Aṅguttara Nikāya 2.””Now, given 1, 2, A-E…
How and why the keys to unfold the multiple of meanings of the Suttas were not laid down somewhere? Why some key words definition are not properly explained in the Suttas, Abhidhamma or old commentaries? The Abhidhamma and commentaries go in full detail, following a strict methodology, and cover everything in the suttas. Its purpose is to explicit define the whole teachings, they were composed during the ages were the dhamma was still pure, yet… they are lacking. What is the point of preserving a text if one does not preserve the way to interpret the text?
I do not understand how was not possible to preserve the patiniddesa. It is not like Buddha partake in developing an extense philosophy. It is not like what has been lost only entertain some minor or advance topics. The full meaning of key points such as anicca, dukkha, anatta, PS, anapanisati… and even stuff like the 5 khandas, the 37 factors is lacking in our present age… and so the eight fold path cannot be properly understood. How this few topics, were not fully explained, in proper and unequivocal patiniddesa, in the Suttas, let alone the Abhidhamma and commentaries.
For instance, the definition of anicca pointed by Waharaka Thero, as “things do not go according our wishes” or “unsustanability of the phenomena to act according our desires” is preserved in the Abhidhamma (although ignored in mainstream theravada). You give the reference in some page I don’t remember right now. I find strange that we cannot find the same information for things like anatta, anapanasati, and so one in all the canon.
*Could you please share your thoughts and put some light into this topic?* If possible reply
# How to get the full picture of the Sutta?
Lal, your explanations of Waharaka’s descriptions of the hidden meaning of anicca, anatta, ana-pana-sati makes a lot sense. The Dhamma feels more complete, bright, and smooth. After all, Buddha and a lot of others wandered mastered sila and samadhi through self-restrain and breath meditation, yet they didn’t get liberated from samsara.
When you discuss the Suttas on puredhamma that need the hidden meaning in order to make sense, is that you discard the conventional meaning all together. My question is, instead of picking one, why not to combine all layers of meaning into a single interpretation? If Buddha was playing with words, then it should give richer results to combine them. At least, in some Suttas, like anapanassati, that is what I feel.
Lal, what I am going to describe is my understanding of one way to do anapanassati. This is what I got, according to my lacking and humble understanding, by combining the different layers of meanings of the anapanassati sutta into one description.
Please, tell me, is that approach right or wrong according to your understanding? I have been practicing like this and to be honest, in my situation (a heavily enrooted monkey mind), it helps to use breath as tempo, reminder, and crutch for keeping sati-sampajañña.
## all-day meditation
The main point of anapanassati is to practice and develop the four supreme efforts (cattaro sammapadhana) at all times. This is done by linking the mind to the four supreme efforts using the breath as yoke.
0.initiation
One put his mind into a kusala state by reflecting some teaching.1k – breathing in / kusala
Every time one breaths in, being sati, one should enhance arisen kusala state. This enhance comes mainly from dhamma vicaya, viriya, piti.2k – breathing out / kusala
Every time one breaths out, being sati, one should prevent new akusala states to arise, and thus keep the kusala state one got from the breath in. This prevent comes mainly from samadhi, passaddhi, upekkha.2a – breathing out / taking out pana akusala
Being sati, if while breathing out, an akusala state arise, then one removes it by contemplating, pondering, and seeing the real dangers and backwards of such akusala state. (PANA).1a – breathing in / taking in ana kusala
If while breathing out an akusala state arose, being sati one breaths in one initiating a new kusala state in a teaching that will help to further dissipate the arose defilement, as well as cool down body and mind. (ANA). [If one failed to get rid of the akusala state during the exhalation, then in this breathing in one should put into practice the method laid down by the Buddha in MN 20]The initiation of a new kusala state is done by remembering and contemplating to a teaching, specially in a theme that is relevant to the defilement arose and our current situation.<br />
If lazy or restless hindrance we may contemplate on dead, if sensual hindrance on repulsiveness, if ill-will hindrance on metta-karuNA-muditA, if doubt hindrance on Buddha qualities.<br />
If we are done some activity, like eating, we are going to reflect on the reasons we are eating, or on the loathsomeness of food.<br />
Other things to contemplate is anicca, dukkha, anatta, PS, and the seven factors themselves.## sitting meditation
If one is already pure, can keep secluded from hindrance (there are only few 2a steps), and is going to do a sitting meditation session… Then one can practice the same but taking in the four tetrads.
So, it is basically the same than the all-day meditation, but one starts by breathing in and taking in the kusala teaching training feeling the whole body. One keeps with that kusala state and theme for some minutes, and then one breaths in picking the next theme training calming the bodily formation, and keeps going. -
Please use a free word-processing program like Word or Google Docs to submit a lengthy comment like this one.
- I started correcting a few things, but I did not want to inadvertently change your meanings, so I stopped. In the future, please take the time to prepare a lengthy comment using a word processor. That will help me and others understand the questions and reply correctly.
I will read the comment and reply later. I hope others will comment in the meantime.
-
I used a linux text processing and copypasted to the wordpress textbox. It looked nice in the visual tab, but once submitted the <br /> appeared. Then I edited removing the <br /> from the visual, but they were added again. Then I removed the <br /> on the text tab and appeared again. Maybe I should have deleted in the text tab the <br /> and the <br />?
The next time I will use Google Doc.
Thanks for your understanding _/|\_
-
-
Hello skywander,
In my opinion, several things are mixed up in your assumptions (#50992).
It is not a completely wrong idea that accompanies your elaboration that “breathing in and breathing out” equates with import and export (or ana and pana), but I would like to explain my thoughts on this to you and point out that I am only a lay student1.) How the teaching was lost?
Here I would consider the period in which people came into contact with the Dhamma. According to my knowledge, and I am referring here only to Sri Lanka, i.e. the Helabima of that time. There the Buddha explained his teaching in Magadhi Prakrit on the island surrounded by water and this language was mostly only spoken by followers of the Sangha or learned Brahmins, everyone else mostly spoke the Hela language which later changed into Sinhala, these were spoken by Putthajana. So whoever spoke a perfect Magadhi Prakrit at that time also understood all three Sutta interpretations – Uddēsa, Niddēsa, Paṭiniddēsa completely with all its keys.
The high knowledge of the world has always been reserved for the Ariya monks of the sangha.
So this knowledge of the key words, i.e. interpretations, had to be written for the ordinary people who did not speak the Maghadhi Prakrit language. So now, as has happened, no interpretation, but only fragments, remain because interpretations of the scriptures were lost through destruction, wars, fires, etc. and there was no continuous Ariyaship. We are all familiar with this process…2.) Therefore, your question should NOT be, “Why were the keys to interpreting the meaning of the Tipitaka not laid down in the Tipitaka?” because the meaning is there. So the question should be…
How is an Arahant, and only an Arahant, able to extract the true meaning from the remaining original scriptures.My answer would be; by adjusting his thought structure through the Noble Eightfold Path like samma Ditthi etc., to the content structure of the scriptures and this adjustment leads to self-knowledge…
3.) You asked, “How do I get a complete picture of the Sutta?” The Suttas are for all of us, i.e. for all characters/gati that exist. And that is why it is so important to be taught the teachings by an Arahant or one of his students who has entered the Holy Path Magga Phala. Only then can one be sure that the right pieces will be found against one’s own gati.
4.) Under “All-day meditation”
There you use three different things(A, B, C) under the term all-day meditation.
A. Breathing meditation …Preliminary stage before Sati..
B. Mindfulness -sati …do this all day…
C. Anāpāna -sati to -samadhi…I explain my view. Breathing meditation is important for many people, especially those living in Western countries, to recognize and learn how to calm the mind in the first place.When this knowledge of calming the mind through the breath is present, the practitioner should use it only in moderation so as not to “cultivate it”, only then can one begin the correct form of meditation. Because meditation cultivates thoughts “Citta-Cetasika etc.” and we cultivate with samadhi in the deepening, i.e. everything that is happening around us at that time and we use a consciousness based on kusala thoughts. One could therefore also describe the entity mind as a “thought-structuring consciousness”. We have several tools at our disposal for this cultivation, such as; Anāpāna<|> Vipassanā/ Ariya Metta etc., to remove the impure structures from the mind/citta “Vidassanā”, which means to sort them out through a clear vision.
And thirdly, mindfulness includes methods to avoid polluting the new and good old cultivated things again. All three points are therefore included in the cultivation of the four Satipatthana. We are cultivating a path, it has nothing to do with religion or science… All three points are not dependent on each other, but build on each other.5.) You said; sitting meditation etc.
In my opinion, meditation should always take place away from civilization without any influences and it doesn’t matter whether you are lying, standing or sitting. The three positions depend on the mental state and sitting is the most balanced/stable. This is also described in many suttas and when we go out among people, we should practice mindfulness of the moment with sati and that is why there are two points in the Eightfold Path: meditation (samma samadhi) and mindfulness (samma sati). To call washing up or gardening meditation, as many do, is nonsense in my opinion. It is mindfulness training (sati training) to cultivate processes that optimize or reveal the interaction between body and mind. First of all, you have to recognize the difference between samma sati and samma samadhi. Two different areas of application. So you could say; samadhi needs a foundation of sati, which requires calming the mind through contemplation of the breath. So there is a meaning in how the individual points of the Eightfold Path are arranged. Only contemplation of the breath cultivates Anariya Jhana and does NOT lead to disillusionment, lack of desire, cessation, peace, insight, awakening and extinction.P.S. I would therefore recommend everyone to follow the links again and to learn and cultivate them as isolated as possible.
2 users thanked author for this post.
-
I think the critical issue is in the following statement:
“1) Buddha’s intention was to deliver everything one needs to attain Nibbana to anyone. He would not teach the higher teaching to people who were not ready for them – it’d be a loss of time for both parties. Yet, Buddha declared that he shared with the Sangha all that he knew relevant to getting to the further shore. So, the Sangha got the full teachings, the texts, the keys to interpret the texts, and their meanings.”
The “the keys to interpret the texts” are in the Tipitaka. However, those “keys” are not apparent to anyone else but Ariyas.
- Once the last Sotapanna on Earth dies, that is the end of the current Buddha Sasana. All the books of the Tipitaka will still be there, but there will be no one who can use the “keys” to explain the key concepts.
- A good example is the current situation. Many deep concepts have been hidden for hundreds of years until Waharaka Thero (a “jati Sotapanna“) uncovered many such “keys.” He clarified many critical issues. Even now, most English texts have “Anapanasati” as “breath meditation” and “anicca” restricted to “impermanence.”
________
Most of the other questions raised can be explained based on the above issue.
For example, the following comment “I do not understand how was not possible to preserve the patiniddesa. It is not like Buddha partake in developing an extense philosophy. .” does not make sense.
- What the Buddha taught was deeper than any philosophy. It is a “previously unknown worldview” that no mundane philosopher can come up with.
- Please read carefully today’s post, “Four Conditions for Attaining Sōtapanna Magga/Phala.” I tried to explain this point there.
______
Another statement of skywander: “I do not understand how was not possible to preserve the patiniddesa.”
- It is the same point as above. There are suttas with the patiniddesa explanations. However, that is not apparent to anyone without getting to Samma Ditthi (i.e., at least reaching the Sotapanna stage.)
- P.S. For example, if one starts with the wrong idea that “Anapanasati” is “breath meditation” then no matter how many suttas they read, they will NEVER make any progress. That is obvious because essentially all translators of suttas into English are still doing that. They have not understood the fundamentals! Many of them have translated suttas with niddesa and patiniddesa and have not been able to unlock the “keys” mentioned above.
_________
I don’t know whether there are questions under:
## all-day meditation”
However, meditation is NOT restricted to “formal meditation,” where one sits in one place and contemplates Dhamma concepts. That is one way and is essential. There is no way that one can engage in akusala during that time. Furthermore, it will help cultivate wisdom (panna), break samyojana, and reach magga phala.
- However, one should also be engaged in meditation all day while doing routine day-to-day activities. That means being mindful of whether one is engaging in akusala kamma. That is one meaning of “Anapanasati.” It is to be noted that there are many levels of akusala kamma. Some, like “killing and stealing,” are easy to catch.
- Even engaging in “excessive sense pleasures” is a lower level of akusala kamma. That may not lead to rebirth in the apayas (when done at lower levels) but will certainly keep one bound to kama loka. These subtle points will become apparent as one cultivates the path.
P.S. I see that Tobi has made some good comments.
3 users thanked author for this post.
-
Thank you for your replies, I appreciate your effort. I am aware that what I am asking is something that probably cannot really be answered, nevertheless I wanted to know your opinions on the matter.
1 So whoever spoke a perfect Magadhi Prakrit at that time also understood all three Sutta interpretations – Uddēsa, Niddēsa, Paṭiniddēsa completely with all its keys.
2 How is an Arahant, and only an Arahant, able to extract the true meaning from the remaining original scriptures2 The “the keys to interpret the texts” are in the Tipitaka. However, those “keys” are not apparent to anyone else but Ariyas.
I understand and agree with both points.
- First of all there’s the issue of the language Magadhi Prakrit. As everything else, it kept changing, evolving, and the language of the Pali Canon was eventually only used in the context of Buddhism teaching. This happened in Sri Lanka, as you said, as well as in all India – according experts.
- To fully understand the teachings one needs to realize them, experience them, not just get an intellectual picture. So, I agree, that not matter how the teaching are preserved, if there are no arahants in the world, there is not going to be a complete understanding of them in the world.
Now, the fact that the teachings have been degraded, is something to be expected, and told by the Buddha. There is one thing I wasn’t able to convey in my original posts: I was concerned about the key meaning of the fundamentals of the teaching. The basics like anicca, dukkha, anatta – and not supramundane topics.
I agree with you both that until one is not an arahant one does not even really comprehend the three marks, because if one fully comprehends them one gets disenchanted by the world, stop acting due ignorance, remove ignorance, and finally attain arahanthood. But at the same time, let’s be realistic, I am a puthujjana: if somebody, ariya or not, tells me “anicca is impermanence“, I can grasp the meaning of anicca, even without really understanding its consequences. In the same way, if somebody, ariya or not, tells me “anicca is the impossibility for sustaining our experience according to our wishes“, I can grasp the meaning of anicca, even without really understanding its consequences. In this case, anicca, the Abhidhamma has properly preserved its meaning. So, my questions was, how is that this is not the case for other fundamental key terms?
For example, the following comment “I do not understand how was not possible to preserve the patiniddesa. It is not like Buddha partake in developing an extense philosophy. .” does not make sense.
P.S. For example, if one starts with the wrong idea that “Anapanasati” is “breath meditation” then no matter how many suttas they read, they will NEVER make any progress.
Lal, I think you missunderstood what I was trying to say. Buddha talked about the handful of leaves for helping people to build the raft and get out. If he intended to fully explain the universe, and talked about dozens or hundreds of handful of leaves, there would be hundred times more concepts. That is what I meant by not extense – specially, if one is concerned on the basics like the four noble truths and the eightfold path, and not on more advanced topics like how thoughts arise in the citta, how kalapas interact, and stuff like that.
One thing is the deep of Buddha’s teaching like the four noble truths, which for most of us will take not lives, but eons, to digest and realize. Quite another is the quantity of the key terms essential to get a proper picture of the eight fold path. In the past two weeks I have been reading a lot of the website, mostly PS and related sections, taking notes. Most of the notes are on the different usages of the different terms, and how identify the proper meaning depending on the context where they are found – I am trying to make a cheatsheet for when reading the suttas.
So, my question was just what reasons could be imagined for explaining that in the Pali canon, for basic terms like anatta, viññana, namarupa, salayatana, are not properly defined depending on the different contexts where they are found, and so. This is something you do in this website, and I assume it is not in the cannon because there are a lot of Theras who have thoroughly studied the cannon and their understanding of such terms doesn’t see.
As you know, there are a lot of Theras, almost all of them!, who read Anapanasati as mere breath meditation. They got this interpretation by reading the Suttas and commentaries with full faith in the Buddha, Dhamma, and Shanga. Yet, what a big miss understanding. It is tragic. And this tragedy the source of my question… from my ignorance I can’t help but think that a big deal of missunderstandings could have been easily avoided if the keys to understand the Canon were obvious even for the ignorant. You explained properly in few words
“Āna” is taking in. “Assa” is the same as “āna”, and “passa” is the same as “āpāna”. When cleaning the room, the child needs to get rid of the clutter (passa) but also can take in (assa) something like a flower vase to make the room look more pleasant or to take in a chair that can be useful. So, one does not throw away everything or take in everything. One must be selective in taking in “good things” and throwing away “bad things.” That is where mindfulness comes in. That cannot be done with breath.
This were just my thoughts. _/|\_
However, meditation is NOT restricted to “formal meditation,”
Yes, by all-day meditation, I meant what I try to do since I wake up until I go to sleep.
1 user thanked author for this post.
-
I think I can summarize what skywander is trying to ask. This website, for example, is laid out in such a way that you wouldn’t need to be an ariya right from the beginning to comprehend the deep meanings. If an English speaking puthujjana discovered this website a 1000 years from now, they could (apparently) become a sotapanna by reading posts here. So the question is why the Tipitaka wasn’t written in the same way.
For example, many suttas that discuss PS do not explicitly mention that sankhara refers to abhisankhara, viññana refers to kamma viññana, etc.
2 users thanked author for this post.
-
I see. Yes. That is a good point.
- However, we don’t understand how nature works in many situations.
- When Arahant Mahinda revived Buddha Dhamma in Sri Lanka, he wrote numerous “Sinhala Atthakatha” which are Commentaries (like Buddhaghosa’s Visuddhimagga or even this website). However, all those disappeared during the “dark period” that probably started before Buddhaghosa came to Sri Lanka to write Visudhimagga. Even though the Tipitaka (or a significant portion of the Tipitaka) survived, those Sinhala Atthakatha completely disappeared. I have discussed some of it in “Incorrect Theravada Interpretations – Historical Timeline.”
- We do not know how the teachings will (i) go underground (like in the above case) for a while or (ii) disappear entirely at the end of Buddha Gotama’s Buddha Sasana. This website or similar “Commentaries” will have no trace left in one of those two cases.
- Many civilizations seem to have disappeared due to natural events such as floods, a comet strike, etc. Scientists believe such a comet impact destroyed most of life on Earth about 60 million years ago when the dinosaurs were also wiped out. The last such “cataclysmic event” seems to have happened about 12,000 years ago: “Younger Dryas impact hypothesis.” This event may not have been as bad as the one that wiped out the dinosaurs.
- There is much evidence that there was an advanced civilization worldwide before that which built pyramids (not only in Egypt but in many parts of the world) and many other sophisticated structures that have survived. I discussed some of it in “Back to Builders of the Ancient Mysteries (BAM) – Full Movie, Documentary.
5 users thanked author for this post.
-
Interpretation is not a simple process. Think about it like this: You put John and Smith in the same room for ten minutes and wait. Then, outside the room, you give them paper and a pen and ask them to describe the room. Even if neither John nor Smith lies at all, there won’t be identical sentences written on the two papers. This is because people read different things from same thing. There can be infinite interpretations of a given text. (Of course, there are valid, sound, and coherent interpretations, as well as those that are not.) It is impossible to write a text in a way that prevents infinite possibilities of interpretation.
If something like abhisankhara or kamma vinnana had been written as it was, the distortion of the Dhamma occurring in the absence of the Ariya would have progressed in a different, unknown manner.
1 user thanked author for this post.
-
I also found it weird that simple words were translated in great detail in the tipitaka, eg old age in Mahasatipatthana sutta, but not more complex words like anatta
Katamā ca, bhikkhave, jarā? Yā tesaṃ tesaṃ sattānaṃ tamhi tamhi sattanikāye jarā jīraṇatā khaṇḍiccaṃ pāliccaṃ valittacatā āyuno saṃhāni indriyānaṃ paripāko, ayaṃ vuccati, bhikkhave, jarā.
And what, monks, is old age? If there is old age for all kinds of beings in whatever kind of existence, their getting frail and decrepit, the breaking [of their teeth], their becoming grey and wrinkled, the running down of their life span, the deterioration of their sense faculties – this, monks, is called old age.
If i were to try and reason it, it could be the case that there was no need to translate them. Let’s say I write a book now and say “the future is unpredictable”. Need I explain “unpredictable”? But let’s say 2500 years later, when technologies improve, things are almost fully predictable, there may be no more words to fully capture this meaning of unpredictability.
I heard of linguistic studies to show that the words in the language we speak reflects the culture and its focus. I do not have the study, but one example I can raise is “Karoshi”, which means death by overwork in Japanese. This word exists for them but not in english because it is more common in Japan.
Likewise, anatta maybe more common in Buddha’s time, and the culture would have more easily grasped the word, so it could have been not necessary to explain it.
-
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.