Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
Claude seems to be able to extract insights from the post. Thanks for sharing it!
- You may get a better analysis by feeding Claude the first seven posts in this section: “Worldview of the Buddha.” The other posts in the section are old posts that require revision; feeding Claude those old posts may lead to confusion.
I watched for about 30 minutes after 37 minutes. It is good. Our bodies are “prepared” to provide color perception, etc.
- Animals, for example, don’t see many colors. They see everything in black and white only. They don’t get to “enjoy” vivid colors!
1 user thanked author for this post.
No Problem. It is better to have its own thread. That way, it would be easier to find in a search with a keyword.
1 user thanked author for this post.
I am not sure about what happens there. It is possible that a Human gandhabba can only see the immediate environment that they are interested in seeing. It is a mechanism that we cannot visualize/imagine. It involves only cakkhu pasada rupa and hadaya vatthu.
- When we see using our physical eyes, anything that reflects (or self-generates) light can be seen.
This is an interesting aspect that we can glean more insight into with the current scientific knowledge about star formation. Also, at the time of the Buddha, Abhidhamma was not taught to the general public, so the details about the manomaya kaya with hadaya vatthu/pasada rupa were not taught.
1. The “first humans” on the newly-formed Earth did not have dense physical bodies like ours, as discussed in “Aggañña Sutta Discussion – Introduction” and “Buddhism and Evolution – Aggañña Sutta (DN 27).” They only had the manomaya kaya, just like the Brahmas in the pabhassara Braham realm. They could see without eyes (they did not have eyes or a brain). Let us look at markers 10.5 and 10.6 ( “Aggañña Sutta (DN 27).”), which describe the first batch of humans born on Earth upon leaving the pabhassara Braham realm. @marker 10.6: “Tedha honti manomayā pītibhakkhā sayaṁpabhā antalikkhacarā subhaṭṭhāyino ciraṁ dīghamaddhānaṁ tiṭṭhanti.” OR “They have mind-made bodies, feeding on rapture, self-luminous, traveling in the air, and they remain like that for a very long time.” Thus, even though “sayaṁpabhā” literally means “self-illuminating,” in this context, it means they did not need sunlight to see. Human gandhabbas, as well as Brahmas, can see without light.
2. The other aspect is the formation process of a star. It happens gradually over millions of years. The star does not “ignite” until its mass reaches a critical density. You can search for “star formation” to find more information. Thus, in the early Earth, our Sun had not yet become a star; it was a giant gas cloud, and due to gravity, it started collapsing into a smaller size gradually. Eventually, it reaches a critical density needed for nuclear fusion and becomes a star.
- By the time the Sun ignited, the humans had developed denser bodies with eyes, brains, etc.
- Please ask questions if anything in the above is not clear.
Yes. I remember this account now. Thank you!
P.S. Grok, Musk’s AI, gave the following description:
- The story you’re referring to is found in Theravāda Buddhist texts, particularly in the Dhammapada commentary (DhA.ii.35) and related sources. It involves Bāhiya Dārucīriya, Pukkusāti, Suppabuddha (the leper), and a fourth individual, Tambadāṭhika, all of whom were killed by a cow. According to the commentary, the cow was a yakkhiṇī (a female spirit) who had been a courtesan in a previous life. The narrative suggests that these four men, in that past life, were sons of wealthy merchants who took the courtesan to a pleasure garden, enjoyed her company, and then killed her to steal the jewels and money they had given her. As she died, she vowed to take revenge on them across multiple existences, and in their final encounters during the Buddha’s time, she manifested as a cow to fulfill this vow.
Furthermore, the following information could be helpful:
- Ven. Bāhiya became an Arahant: “Bāhiya Sutta (Ud 1.10)” Venerable Pukkusāti became an Anagami: “Dhātuvibhaṅga Sutta (MN 140)” Suppabuddha became a Sotapanna: “Suppabuddhakuṭṭhi Sutta (Ud 5.3)”
1 user thanked author for this post.
Jittananto has provided an interesting aspect to the account of Tambadathika: “Bāhiya, Pukkusāti, Tambadathika – All Killed by the Same Cow.”
- Thank you, Jittananto!
1 user thanked author for this post.
I didn’t realize Taryal had closed the thread because I posted my above comment.
- Pathfinder just emailed me saying he could not post. I have now re-opened the thread.
Pathfinder also emailed me saying it is Dhammapda verse 100: “Dhammapada Verse 100“
- I could not open the link Pathfinder emailed me, but the above should give the idea. Thank you, Pathfinder!
As I thought, that person, the executioner (Tambadathika) had attained anuloma nana before he died, i.e., Sotapanna Anugami. That is why he was reborn in a Deva realm.
- We also remember that Angulimala killed almost a thousand people but attained Arahanthood before death. See “Account of Angulimāla – Many Insights to Buddha Dhamma.”
- Thus, as long as it is not an anantariya kamma, it can be overcome.
2 users thanked author for this post.
Taryal does not want to participate in the discussion, but we can continue it because it may yield some insights.
- In particular, I like to see the sutta reference relevant to the last part of Yash’s comment. I believe there is more to that account.
Let me address Taryal’s comment regarding my comment. By analyzing that last part of Taryal’s comment, I think we can clarify a few issues.
Taryal: “Yes, but would you say that the “intention” here is the same as murdering a human who is already living independent of the mother and poses no harm to her?”
- Here, “intention” is a critical word. The Pali word is “cetanā.” However, as in many cases, we must understand that by “cetanā” the Buddha always referred to “sañcetanā” or “intentions with raga, dosa, moha embedded.” See, for example, “Sattaṭṭhāna Sutta (SN 22.57).” Also see “Nibbedhika Sutta (AN 6.63)“: “Cetanāhaṁ, bhikkhave, kammaṁ vadāmi. Cetayitvā kammaṁ karoti—kāyena vācāya manasā.” OR “with (defiled) intention, one does kamma by way of body, speech, and mind.”
- Most people do not even know that taking a life can lead to harmful consequences, i.e., kamma vipaka. They don’t believe in kamma/kamma vipaka. That does not mean they did not have (defiled) intention!
- Therefore, ignorance is not an excuse. These are nature’s laws. Kamma vipaka happen not because the Buddha says so, but because it is how nature works. The Buddha only discovered nature’s laws.
- As I said many times above, living life is not easy. That is why we need to get out of the rebirth process. If one is born an animal, they have no way to rationalize why they can be eaten alive by a bigger animal. Some women say, “It is unfair that only women have to carry a baby in the womb.” But it is not a question of fairness; things happen due to causes and conditions.
Trayal wrote: “For instance, a policeman killing a criminal does so with a different intention than the opposite.”
- The policeman will bear the consequences of taking a life. He would also benefit from it if the criminal were about to kill another person. This is why sorting out kamma vipaka is impossible. Most actions involve both aspects.
Taryal wrote: ” If a wild animal kills its parent, that would not be an anantarika kamma, would it?”
- We don’t know with certainty because that has not been discussed directly in the Tipitaka, especially in the suttas. But it is unlikely to be.
- An animal’s mental states are very different from a human’s. Certain types of cittas cannot arise in an animal. So, it is likely from Abhidhamma analysis that an animal cannot do an anantarika kamma.
- Yet, we are talking about humans on this topic.
Taryal wrote: “..since there is no such thing as “absolute morality” (as I understand it)”
- Again, not knowing about kamma/kamma vipaka is not an excuse for humans. They have the capability to understand that taking a life is going to its consequences. People are trapped in the rebirth process because they are unaware of how nature works. Until a Buddha explains, and until one hears and comprehends it, no one would know.
- One could say that is unfair. But this world (nature) does not play by superficial “fairness.” There is a set of rules (Paticca Samuppada), and things happen according to those rules.
- Understanding Paticca Samuppada can reveal “absolute morality.” This will lead to the cessation of this world with all its conflicts and suffering.
1 user thanked author for this post.
OK. I forgot the context.
- If Taryal was referring to aborting a pregnancy, I agree with Christian. Aborting a pregnancy is taking a human life, as I pointed out in previous comments. It is done with intention.
Taryal wrote: “So I remain unconvinced that their minds will release javana citta equivalent to the strength of “murdering” a human that is already living independent of their mother.”
- That statement is correct. When I wrote my comment, I thought you had written the opposite. That is why I recommended those two posts, which also convey the same idea that you did. Taking a human life is a billion-fold worse than killing an animal. Along the same line, taking the life of an Arahant (which is an anantariya kamma) is a billion-fold worse than killing an average human.
- Of course, we must refrain from taking any life.
P.S. Probably Christian read Taryal’s comment the same way I did.
“Does it mean that when I see a flower, then the cakkhu viññana is born, and when I close my eyes, the cakkhu viññana ceases?”
- Yes. You no longer see with your eyes closed.
- However, it is impossible to “close the mind” while you are conscious. So, you may be thinking about what you saw.
“In the same way, do the other aggregates arise and cease in this manner? Therefore when there is no input, no sights, smells, sounds, taste, touch, ideas temporarily (eg, in sleeping), there is no 5 aggregates arising at that moment?”
- Yes. We have five “doors” (eyes, ears, nose, tongue, and the body) that bring external sensations (sights, sounds, smells, tastes, and body touches.)
- Four of those may be blocked by going into a dark, sound-proof room, but you will still feel your feet touching the floor. Again, it is impossible to “close the mind” while you are conscious.
1 user thanked author for this post.
Yes. Kamma generation is a tricky subject.
- I suggest reading the posts “How to Evaluate Weights of Different Kamma“ and “What is Kamma? – Is Everything Determined by Kamma?“
- We can discuss further after that.
You wrote: “And, I didn’t understand exactly what ‘a glimpse of Nibbana‘ means, which is thanks to your explanation that that experience happens without distorted saññā at the moment of attaining the Sotapanna stage.”
- I am glad that you understood.
- All our immoral deeds (and thus future suffering) are based on the distorted saññā, i.e., our false perception that external things (sights, sounds, tastes, ..) have mind-pleasing aspects embedded in them.
- Paṭicca Samuppāda programs our mental and physical bodies AND those external things to provide that distorted saññā. This is THE critical aspect to understand. I explained that in the first few posts in the “Worldview of the Buddha” section. Everything in the world arises via Paṭicca Samuppāda; it is a universal principle like Newton’s laws of motion. However, only a Buddha can discover Paṭicca Samuppāda because it is a mental phenomenon, not a material one.
- All our thinking is clouded by that distorted saññā. Thus, we could say it is a root cause of avijjā. That is why it is the “Root of All Things”: “Mūlapariyāya Sutta – The Root of All Things” and “Saññā Nidānā hi Papañca Saṅkhā – Immoral Thoughts Based on ‘Distorted Saññā’.”
- If someone can get that basic idea, the upcoming posts will help clarify things further. Otherwise, forthcoming posts may not make sense. Also, read the previous comments in this thread.
1 user thanked author for this post.
