August 8, 2018 at 2:25 pm #17804
In the post Six Root Causes – Loka Samudaya (Arising of Suffering) and Loka Nirodhaya (Nibbana), it is written in #4: However, amōha is not a cētasika (mental factor), and instead what one cultivates is paññā cētasika. One attains Nibbāna by cultivating paññā.
It is also written in #5: When one comprehends Tilakkhana, one will also lose the 3 good roots automatically, with wisdom.
When one’s paññā becomes optimum at the Arahant stage, all six root causes would have been removed.
How does one lose amoha, if it is the absence of moha, a cause of existence? For example, Nibbana is permanent and eternal, simply because it is the absence of all causes, and thus is timeless and cannot perish.
If amoha is not a cetasika, but the panna cetasika is cultivated instead, what is removed? Is it panna? For surely amoha would seem like nibbana, except that while nibbana is free of all causes, amoha is free of moha.
In essence, how can the absence of a cause of existence itself be another cause of existence?
Is there something wrong with my understanding?
Thank you very much in advance for your answers to my question.
August 8, 2018 at 6:27 pm #17805
Before I contribute my bit, what do you make of:
‘8. Therefore, one can do kusala kamma without getting rid of amōha, i.e., without cultivating paññā: most people engage in giving, have compassion for others, etc. This is a key point to remember.’
Should it not be…’without getting rid of moha’ rather than of amoha? ..since ‘without getting rid of amoha’ = retaining (cultivating) amoha, therefore ‘i.e. without cultivating panna’ does not tally; ‘without cultivating the opposite of, or that which preceded, panna (amoha) does.
How do you see this? Or is there something wrong in MY understanding?
August 8, 2018 at 8:01 pm #17807
“How does one lose amoha, if it is the absence of moha, a cause of existence? For example, Nibbana is permanent and eternal, simply because it is the absence of all causes, and thus is timeless and cannot perish.”
Amoha simply means “absence of moha” at that particular time. One can act without moha (mind covered with defilements) a certain time and can act with moha at other times when tempted by an appealing sense object.
– However, a mind “not covered by defilements” does not necessarily mean one knows the real nature of this this world, i.e., Tilakkhna (that it is absolutely nothing fruitful to be had in this world).
– This is the essential point to be understood in getting to the Noble Path, i.e., to become a Sotapanna.
“If amoha is not a cetasika, but the panna cetasika is cultivated instead, what is removed?”
Again, it is important to realize that one can act with amoha with moha REMAINING hidden in the mind as an anusaya. As long as one has moha anusaya, one can act with moha OR amoha depending on the sense input.
– Let us take an example to clarify this point: Person X with moha anusaya may see a drowning person Y, generate compassion, jumps into water and save Y. So, at that particular time, X acted without moha.
– However, when one cultivates panna, one will not be acting with moha AT ANY TIME. That person has removed moha anusaya, and thus will not go back and forth between moha and amoha.
– This is the uniqueness in Buddha Dhamma: to realize that one cannot be PERMANENTLY moral, until one comprehends Tilakkhana, the futility of things in this world.
“In essence, how can the absence of a cause of existence itself be another cause of existence?”
– But as I explained in the post, amoha (without panna) IS A CAUSE for existence. It gives rise to rebirths in the “good realms”.
– I am glad that firewrns asked these questions. These are subtle points that need to be contemplated on and understood. That is how one’s understanding can become complete: CONTEMPLATION. That is insight mediation. It may be helpful to do a search on “anusaya gathi gati” (because I have spelled gati sometimes as gathi) and read the relevant posts.
– Anusaya and gati can be REMOVED only by cultivating panna. Essentially, anusaya and gati CANNOT be removed without comprehending the real nature of this world, Tilakkhana: anicca, dukkha, anatta. You may also want to listen to: Three Marks of Existence – English Discourses
Finally, regarding the post in question ynot pointed out a mistake that I made: “without getting rid of moha rather than of amoha?” that appeared in #8 of that post.
– I just fixed it. Thanks, ynot.
August 8, 2018 at 9:19 pm #17808
………..’Before I contribute my bit…’
Now it turns out that what I did contribute WAS my bit.
Thank you Lal
Thank you firewns for bringing these questions up.
August 9, 2018 at 7:01 am #17809Tobias GParticipant
In #8 it says:
“Therefore, one can do kusala kamma without getting rid of mōha, i.e., without cultivating paññā: most people engage in giving, have compassion for others, etc. This is a key point to remember.”
But “ku+sala” means to get rid of kilesa (lobha, dosa, moha). So one can do punna kamma without getting rid of moha, i.e. without cultivating panna. Do I get something wrong with ku+sala?
August 9, 2018 at 7:07 am #17810Tobias GParticipant
I just see in #9 it is explained as: low level kusala kamma are punna kamma. Oookay.
August 9, 2018 at 9:03 am #17811
“But “ku+sala” means to get rid of kilesa (lobha, dosa, moha”
As I understand it, kusala kamma involves and is the PROCESS of getting rid (in time)of the kilesas, not that being rid of the kilesas in the first place is the condition on which one performs kusala kamma. If it were so, kusala kamma would be reserved for Arahants.
Note that it says ‘ to get rid’ (a process), not to ‘be rid'(a state of being)
So yes, as I see, ‘So one can do punna kamma without getting rid of moha, i.e. without cultivating panna.’
August 10, 2018 at 6:10 am #17812
“As I understand it, kusala kamma involves and is the PROCESS of getting rid (in time)of the kilesas, not that being rid of the kilesas in the first place is the condition on which one performs kusala kamma. If it were so, kusala kamma would be reserved for Arahants.”
Good observation, y not.
August 10, 2018 at 12:12 pm #17813
Thank you once again, Lal, y not and Tobias for your answers and contributions to this post.
Lal, your link to the discourses was very helpful. I have listened to two of the desanas and have benefitted greatly. Thank you very much!
August 10, 2018 at 9:49 pm #17815
I am glad that you found them useful, firewns.
If you have any questions on those audios, there is a separate forum to ask questions on them: “Three Marks of Existence Discourses”.
August 14, 2018 at 12:43 am #17825
Once again, Lal, thank you so much for your guidance!
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.