Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
Jittananto wrote: ” I recommend that everyone unfamiliar with this concept watch the sermon as a whole to gain a deeper understanding.”
1. I listened to the whole discourse last night.
- That discourse gives a superficial understanding of saññā (perception). By the way, the word ‘saññā‘ is not even mentioned.
- It does not provide “a deeper understanding.”
- So, I am not saying that discourse is useless, but it does not provide any additional information on what I am trying to convey.
2. You did not grasp that deeper meaning when you wrote the previous long comment either.
- That is why I wrote the following in response to it.
“You wrote: “Because of Ignorance (Avijja), we believe the Samsara is pleasurable, therefore we attach (Ragā) ourselves to the 31 realms.”
- Yes. We can say that avijja is the ignorance of the role played by the (distorted) saññā, which is ‘kāma saññā‘ in our kāma loka.
- Without colors, tastes, smells, etc. (generated via ‘kāma saññā‘), we would not crave anything in the kāma loka. Thus, ‘kāma saññā‘ is the trigger for our attachments.
- I tried to explain that in the post What Does “Paccayā” Mean in Paṭicca Samuppāda? “
__________
3. Anyway, I will write more on this critical issue when I start a new series on the pañcupādānakkhandha.
- I wonder how many people grasped the concept. Of course, not all participate in the forum.
- When people post discourses that are not really relevant to the point I am trying to make, it diverts the focus. Of course, I understand that everyone has good intentions.
- Buddha’s teachings are much deeper than many believe. Again, my goal is not a wider audience but to get at least a few to the Sotapanna stage.
Where does the Thero talk about saññā?
- When you provide a link to a given subject, please point out the relevant timestamps.
Tobias asked: “Why is a physical body necessary for distorted sanna and hence kamma generation?”
- A human gandhabba is the essence of a human. It has ‘distorted saññā‘ (i.e., kāma saññā).
- It is just that it cannot fulfil its desires for tastes, smells, and touches since it does not have a physical body.
- Since it does not have a physical body, it cannot engage in killing, stealing, or sexual misconduct. But even though it cannot speak out, it can still generate vaci kamma with vaci saṅkhāra. See #7 of “Correct Meaning of Vacī Sankhāra.” Even though it is unable to do the three types of kamma with the physical body, a gandhabba still generates the urge to engage in them, i.e., generate vaci saṅkhāra. Thus, it probably lives a frustrated life.
- Therefore, it can still generate kammic energies through vaci saṅkhāra and mano saṅkhāra. It is just unable to carry out some of the wishes.
I hope the above answers questions in DammaSponge’s mind. If not, feel free to ask any remaining questions.
1 user thanked author for this post.
Good summary!
You wrote: “Because of Ignorance (Avijja), we believe the Samsara is pleasurable, therefore we attach (Ragā) ourselves to the 31 realms.”
- Yes. We can say that avijja is the ignorance of the role played by the (distorted) saññā, which is ‘kāma saññā‘ in our kāma loka.
- Without colors, tastes, smells, etc. (generated via ‘kāma saññā‘), we would not crave anything in the kāma loka. Thus, ‘kāma saññā‘ is the trigger for our attachments.
- I tried to explain that in the post What Does “Paccayā” Mean in Paṭicca Samuppāda?
1 user thanked author for this post.
I made several revisions to the above post since it was first posted. Please feel free to comment/ask questions.
1 user thanked author for this post.
1. To really understand the ‘anicca nature,’ one must understand the concept of ‘saññā.’
- ‘Saññā‘ is an ‘innate sense’ that is built into our bodies. The simplest idea is in the loose translation of saññā as ‘perception’ (in the sense of two people having different ‘perceptions of a third person (X), i.e., one says X is a good person and the other says X is a ‘bad person’). A bit deeper example is birds flying long distances over thousand of miles based on their built-in saññā that they need to fly to a different location to survive the upcoming weather change; they just ‘feel’ they need to start flying in a certain direction for a certain time!
- Here is an even more complex version of saññā: Seeing colors is a ‘saññā,’ and that is a mirage, according to the Buddha. The color of an object is not real. Objects do not have inherent colors, and the light does not have colors either. The following video explains both points based on modern science.
- At 2.30 minutes, he says that the process by which the brain interprets the signals from the sensors at the back of the retina as ‘red’ is not understood by science. That is because ‘color perception’ does not occur in the brain.
- So, where does the ‘perception of blue, red, etc.’ come from?
2. Think deeply about this issue. Scientists do not know where the perception of the color (‘red’ or ‘blue’) comes from.
- The colors are all made up by the mind in a very complex process.
- In the same way, tastes, smells, pleasing music, and the pleasure of touch are all mind-made. They are all ‘saññā‘ made up by the mind (not in real time, but through a very complex process in which our bodies and the external world arise via Paṭicca Samuppāda). P.S. See “Paṭicca Samuppāda Creates the External World, Too!“
3. I posted a version of this in another comment with more details. It is my comment on November 11, 2025, at 8:33 am (my last comment on that thread as of today): Post on ‘Colors Are Mind-Made (Due to Kāma Saññā)’
- I do not understand why people are having such a hard time understanding this.
- Just think about a single issue. Where do colors come from? Objects do not have inherent colors, and neither does light, which is electromagnetic radiation or just energy. As the above video explains, modern science has confirmed that. P.S. But being materialists who don’t believe in rebirth, they don’t care if the ‘pleasure sensation’ is created in the brain (as they believe); for them, the goal is to enjoy life while it lasts. However, it matters immensely if rebirth is real; one will be trapped in the ‘kāma loka‘ (including the apāyās) as long as one craves those so-called ‘pleasures.’
- In the same way, tastes, smells, etc., are not real either. But we attach to things in the world solely on the basis of those characteristics.
- That is why the Buddha said that attaching to those things is of ‘anicca nature’ (because they cannot provide long-lasting happiness; those ‘pleasures’ are brief and unsatisfying). Furthermore, our actions seeking such ‘pleasures’ only lead to rebirths in the apāyās. See “Fooled by Distorted Saññā (Sañjānāti) – Origin of Attachment (Taṇhā).”
- We will never be satisfied, even when we get to enjoy all those colorful, tasty things. There are many millionaires/billionaires in the world who can afford any of those things. Are they satisfied with life? Some even commit suicide! In any case, they also get old, suffer the old age issues, and die.
4. Based on the above, I tried to explain how one can get to the Sotapanna stage.
- The following are a few of the relevant posts: Sotapanna Anugāmi and Anicca/Viparināmi Nature of a Defiled Mind, Colors Are Mind-Made (Due to Kāma Saññā), What Does “Paccayā” Mean in Paṭicca Samuppāda?
- I hope at least a few people will start comprehending what I have been trying to explain over the past two to three years.
- Of course, it takes a determined effort to understand these deep concepts.
- Our human existence is the best opportunity we have. Those in the apāyās (including animals) cannot comprehend these issues. Those in the Deva and Brahma realms do not experience or see suffering, and so are not motivated to contemplate the ‘anicca nature.’ Even the rich and healthy among us cannot be motivated! They are too busy enjoying life (not realizing that it is a magic show in a grand scale)!
1 user thanked author for this post.
A Habit is formed by repeated actions that strengthen it. Until you see the bad consequences of a habit, you cannot break it.
- Once you comprehend the dangers of sticking to a specific habit, you can break it with determination.
- In a nutshell, that’s how you break a habit.
- A habit is formed not strictly due to vipaka (if that were the case, you would not be able to break it). Habits are induced mostly by environmental factors. For example, many young people develop the habit of drinking due to the association with bad friends.
The Thero may have explained the correct concepts in the discourse. It is not possible to capture the essence of a discourse by listening to a sentence or two. I have not listened to the whole discourse, so I cannot say anything specific.
1 user thanked author for this post.
DhammaSponge wrote: “The overarching thesis of this video is that habits are nothing more than collections of vipaka.”
- Where is that stated in the discourse? Please provide the time interval where this point is made. I would like to listen to that section.
Here, “upa” and “dāna” are the key terms. They mean “keeping close” and “to give.” As we know, “dāna, sila, bhāvanā” are key components of Buddhist living.
- Then “ādāna” is the opposite of“dāna,” i.e., to “receive or get,”
- Thus, ‘upādāna‘ (“upa” + “ādāna”) is to “pull toward oneself” or “keep close to oneself.” Furthermore, “upādāya” means “to help or assist with the ‘upādāna‘ process. Thus, “upādāya rupa” helps with inducing craving.
- ‘Upādāna‘ is triggered by taṇhā. In Paticca Samuppada, “taṇhā paccayā upādāna.”
__________
Tobias asked; ” how could the disciples figure out or put together the Abhidhamma theory 200 years after the Buddha’s passing? “
- You perhaps did not read the post “Abhidhamma – Introduction.” Please do so.
- Keep in mind that the Buddha explained the Abhidhamma framework to Ven. Sariputta in detail; you need to read that post.
- Furthermore, those bhikkhus were all Arahants. Abhidhamma was finalized at the Third Buddhist Council (roughly 200 years after the Buddha), and the whole Tipitaka was written down only about 500 years after the Buddha (again by all Arahants).
P.S. Compiling the Abhidhamma theory is not an easy task. I read somewhere the following analogy. Using the Sutta Pitaka to attain Nibbana is like making a cake with a recipe, where one starts with the raw ingredients—like flour and sugar. In Abhidhamma, one can also explain the composition of flour and sugar at the atomic/molecular level.
1 user thanked author for this post.
I haven’t watched the video posted by TGS.
- I wanted to make a comment about the question about the ‘vaṇṇa’ component of a suddhāṭṭhaka raised by Ajith, but in a wider perspective regarding the Colors are mind-made (Due to kama sanna) post.
As the post, Buddhist Theory of Matter – Fundamentals (with more details in “The Origin of Matter – Suddhāṭṭhaka“) explains, the “rasa” component originates from our craving for tasty foods. Thus, greedy thoughts based on the taste of honey, for example, would create suddhāṭṭhaka, leading to the availability of honey in the world (via Paticca Samuppada); see “Paṭicca Samuppāda Creates the External World, Too!” Honey would have a dominant presence of the rasa component; since it is a liquid, it would also have a significant apo component.
- In the same way, certain things that give off an enticing aroma (like flowers) are created via Paticca Samuppada to fulfill our desire for “nice-smelling things.” There, the aroma is associated with the ‘gandha‘ (meaning odor) component in a suddhāṭṭhaka.
- The ‘vaṇṇa’ component in a suddhāṭṭhaka arises due to our craving in general for ‘mind-pleasing things,’ including attractive people and things, music, etc.
The only way that Nature (via Paticca Samuppada) can satisfy those cravings is by ‘creating illusions of nice taste, smells, sights, sounds, etc ‘ via saññā.
- That is why the Buddha compared saññā to a mirage. It has no substance. See “Fooled by Distorted Saññā (Sañjānāti) – Origin of Attachment (Taṇhā).”
- For example, there are no ‘colors’ in objects or the light. Colors are totally mind-made! They are there to satisfy that craving for attractive things. The following video explains that life would be boring without colors:
Life would be pretty boring without colors! But the world is truly ‘colorless.’ It is the ‘ultimate reality.’
- It is from the post, “Colors Are Mind-Made (Due to Kāma Saññā).”
The following video is also from that post, which explains that modern science also accepts that color is a perception and not there in objects or light. But scientists believe that perception (saññā) is made in the brain. But a brain is made of inert atoms and molecules, and cannot perceive anything!
- The ‘color perception’, according to modern science, is explained well in the following video by a physicist.
- At 2.30 minutes, he says that the process by which the brain interprets the signals from the sensors at the back of the retina as ‘red’ is not understood by science. That is because ‘color perception’ does not occur in the brain.
If one can understand the posts on saññā, one would lose cravings for sights, sounds, tastes, smells, and even sex.
- We are bound to this suffering-filled rebirth process only because we are fooled by ‘kama saññā‘ in our kama loka.
- Understanding saññā will help immensely with attaining the Sotapanna stage and beyond.
1 user thanked author for this post.
Yes. You are correct that only the four maha bhuta are mentioned as components of the ‘fundamental element of matter’ in the suttas. In fact, the suttas do not use the word suddhāṭṭhaka for that ‘fundamental element of matter.’
- That is because Abhidhamma was not taught (or even fully developed) during the lifetime of the Buddha. The Buddha taught the essential elements to Ven. Sariputta, and ‘his lineage of bhikkhus‘ developed the Abhidhamma theory over many generations. It was finalized about 200 years after the Buddha’s passing. See “Abhidhamma – Introduction.”
- The eight elements in a suddhāṭṭhaka are discussed in “The Origin of Matter – Suddhāṭṭhaka.” The following is in that post:
Suddhāṭṭhaka (“suddha” for “pure” or fundamental” + “aṭṭha” or “eight”) means a unit of matter consisting of eight fundamental entities (usually translated as the ‘pure octad’).
- Four of these belong to the “bhūta” stage of pathavi, āpo, tejo, and vāyo arising due to avijjā.
- The craving for material things leads to four more due to taṇhā. Those are vaṇṇa, gandha, rasa, and oja are created due to taṇhā. The four upādāya rūpa are based on tanha that you mentioned (as the suttas refer to) are these four.
- Since Abhidhamma was not taught during the time of the Buddha, the four units arising due to tanha were only referred to as ‘upādāya rūpa.’
P.S. The word ‘upādāya‘ is related to ‘upādāna‘ and thus, tanha.
1 user thanked author for this post.
A ‘dhammatā‘ is something taking place according to ‘nature’s laws, and those laws are based on Paticca Samuppada.
- The post Tobias refers to is “Kāya Can be Pañcupādānakkhandha or Physical Body” and #6 of the post is as follows:
6. “Sakkāya Sutta (SN 22.105)” asks, “Katamo ca, bhikkhave, sakkāyo?” (What is sakkāya?). The answer is “Pañcupādānakkhandhātissa vacanīyaṁ” (“I say it is Pañcupādānakkhandhā“).
- The same answer is given in the “Sakkāyapañhā Sutta (SN 38.15)“: “Pañcime, āvuso, upādānakkhandhā sakkāyo vutto bhagavatā” or “āvuso, the Buddha said that pañcupādānakkhandhā are sakkāya.”
- Here, “sakkāya” is “sath kāya” or “beneficial kāya.” Furthermore, “sakkāya ditthi” is “to view (pañcupādānakkhandha)kāya as beneficial.”
- One will have sakkāya ditthi as long as they view sensory pleasures as beneficial. However, since a Sotapanna has not removed kāma rāga, they will still be attached to sensory pleasures; still, they would not do apāyagāmi deeds that lead to rebirths in the apāyās. That happens automatically, without conscious thinking, i.e., it is a dhammatā.
1 user thanked author for this post.
Hello Ajith,
No. There is no contradiction with that post.
- Can you pinpoint a bullet number or a statement in that post such a contradiction is implied?
- It is possible that you may be thinking about the ‘vaṇṇa’ component of a suddhāṭṭhaka (in #6 of the second post). Sometimes ‘vaṇṇa’ is translated into Sinhala as ‘වර්ණ ‘ meaning ‘color’; but that is not what it means in this case.
- There, you need to take the meaning of ‘highly impressed’ (as in the case of attaching to something because one is enjoying it very much). In Sinhala, one could say ‘වර්ණනා කිරීම.’ That could be regrading something that is seen.
New:
First Stage of Ānāpānasati – Verses in Ānāpānasati Sutta
Revised:
2 users thanked author for this post.
