Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
I only translated the verses that you quoted, Tobias.
- Usually, suttas or Commentaries discuss the four of them together as four vipallasa.
- Also, other suttas discuss anicca, dukkha, and anatta (without asubha) when NOT discussing vipallasa. There, the discussion is NOT directly about vipallasa.
Four āhāra: kabaḷīkāra āhāra, phassa, manosañcetanā, viññāṇāhāra.
Four vvipallāsa: asubhe subha, dukkhe sukha, anatte atta, anicce nicca.
First verse:
The four vipallāsa are connected with the four āhāra, respectively. There is no more of either type.
Second verse:
The first vipallāsa leads to kāma raga. That is kāma upādāna.
The second vipallāsa leads to expectations of future existence (anāgataṁ bhava.) That is silabbata upādāna.
The third vipallāsa leads to distorted views (viparīto diṭṭhi.) That is diṭṭhi upādāna.
The fourth vipallāsa leads to upādāna with the idea that pancupadanakkhandha is fruitful (khandhe attato upādiyati.) That is attavāda upādāna.
Third verse:
With kāma upādāna one craves kāma assāda. That is called abhijjhākāyagantho.
With silabbata upādāna leads to vyāpāda (byāpāda.) That is called byāpādakāyagantho.
With diṭṭhi upādāna leads to the idea of fruitfulness ( parāmāsaṁ ganthati.) That is parāmāsakāyagantho.
With attavāda upādāna, one will engage in immoral deeds (papañcanto ganthati.) That is idaṁsaccābhiniveso kāyagantho.
I have not discussed words like parāmāsa, gantha, etc. But I have tried to provide the general ideas.
No Problem! Yes. Please check the online version before posting. I keep revising posts regularly.
- Seng Kiat does a great job of keeping up with the revisions.
- However, sometimes I don’t notify him of minor corrections, like changing from 2011 to 2001.
- So, it is OK to read Seng Kiat’s eBook, especially if you use the current version. He revises it every week when send him a list of revised posts. Again, I don’t notify him of a change of a few words.
You may be referring to “Anatta in Anattalakkhaṇa Sutta – Part 1” and NOT “Anatta is a Characteristic of the World, not About a “Self”
- I revised #2. But #4 had the year correct as 2001.
There is more information here from the Petakopadesa: “Suttavebhaṅgiya“
- So, it may not be as simple as the chart in #14 of the post “Vipallāsa (Diṭṭhi, Saññā, Citta) Affect Saṅkhāra”
Yes. Those need to be corrected. But are they in the same post or a different post?
- Of course, I appreciate anyone pointing out such errors. Sometimes, what I write may not fully reflect what I think! I am not sure why that is. But that happens to us all.
- That terrorist attack example is a good one. Of course, I knew that it happened in 2001. But somehow, it got typed as 2011.
- In addition, in some cases, my understanding may be improved, or there may be a better way to say the same thing.
- Please don’t hesitate to point out any type of errors.
1 user thanked author for this post.
Yes. That is correct.
Eventually, one will realize that no “rupa” (whether it is a poisoned cake or a poison-free cake) is of nicca, sukha, and atta nature.
- That complete comprehension of “yathabhuta nana” comes in stages and is complete at the Arahant stage. Then one will not be interested in any cake (of course, an Arahant will eat cake to satisfy hunger).
That holds for all five aggreagtes INCLUDING vedana, sanna, sankhara, vinnana. They all have the anatta (unfruitful) characteristic.
Thank you, LDF!
I revised it to:
“That is why the Buddha always referred to aggregates. For example, as we discussed, rupakkhandha includes our mental impressions of physical rupa ever arose in our minds. Similarly for vedanākkhandha, saññākkhandha, saṅkhārakkhandha, viññāṇakkhandha. “
P.S. It is critically important to realize that — unless expressly specified — the Buddha always referred by “rupa” or “rupaṁ” to such mental impressions that arose in our minds, and NOT the physical rupa out in the external world.
Unfortunately, there is not that much information on vipallasa in the Tipitaka.
There is only one sutta that I quoted in the post.
I just did a search: “7 results for diṭṭhivipallāso.” We can explore these and see whether there is anything new.
Thank you, Tobias.
- It seems to be consistent with Nettipakarana and Seng Kiat’s chart.
I will look at both references and may need to revise the post as necessary. Please feel free to comment in the meantime.
Sorry. I missed that part of your previous comment.
Good point. I have been thinking about that.
- The chart at the end of the post you linked to in your first post is based solely on Nettipakarana, a Commentary in the Tipitaka. It is a reliable Commentary, but we must look for other evidence in the Tipitaka.
- If anyone finds any related information, please post it here.
Those dictionary terms are not far off.
- subha: auspicious is better. That means it can mostly bring benefits.
- sukha : the opposite of dukha or suffering.
Tilakkhana (anicca, dukkha, anatta) are characteristics of nature. One could say asubha could/should be included there too. Of course, the word Tilakkhana is not in the Tipitaka; at least, I have not seen it in the Tipitaka.
- However, many suttas discuss only anicca, dukkha, anatta, and mutual relationships among them.
Asubha is always mentioned (together with anicca, dukkha, and anatta) under vipallasa (mental confusion.)
Thank you, DanielSt.
I watched a bit of it at 1:33:20 time. Venerable explains it well.
- “Me” is there because some experiences are “enjoyable.” So, the effort is to get more of such “enjoyable experiences.”
- Such efforts involve immoral activities (at least on some occasions), leading to trouble in the future (in terms of kamma vipaka.)
Lang wrote: “The Bāhiya Sutta says something like: “seeing is just a trace of seeing, hearing is just a trace of hearing, …” (“diṭṭhe diṭṭhamattaṃ bhavissati, sute sutamattaṃ bhavissati, …”
- That statement is a bit deeper.
What I wrote, ”The apple that you saw is NOT the same as the apple itself. It is just an image of the apple captured by your eyes” is just a (initial) part of that deeper statement to Bahiya.
- Mine is a simpler statement. But you can get the idea if you think about how we see an object in more detail. The light must bring an image of the object (say, a person) to our eyes. That does not happen “in one shot,” like taking a picture with a camera. Within a split second, the eyes capture several images (from different parts of the person). The brain processes all that information and sends those to the hadaya vatthu in several “data packets.” It is the mind that “puts together” all those different frames and makes a “unified picture of a person X.”
- The “image of X” that arises in the mind is a “mind construction.”
- In addition to “making a coherent picture of a person,” the mind also adds to that “picture” our pre-existing biases of X.
- The point is that what we experience is BASED ON the physical body of X. But what we experience is purely a mental construct. It has built-in sanna (recognition, not only as a person but also as a friend or foe) and vedana (somanassa/domanassa/neutral).
We can make a rough connection to the verse in the Bahiya as follows:
- Our biases (seeing X as a friend, foe, etc.) are based on the defilements in our minds. That itself originates from the idea of “I am seeing X.”
- But, in reality, it is only a “seeing event” that happens with a series of “snapshots.” (There is no “seer” in the ultimate sense, which is what Bahiya understood and instantly attained Arahanthood!) Each snapshot goes to the past before the next one arrives. It is the mind that “puts together all such events that are already in the past” and presents a “picture of X” as a rupakkhandha (aggregate of several snapshots AND also taking into account our past experiences with X). Amazingly, the mind can do all that in a split second.
- The discussion in #1 and #2 of the following post could be helpful: “Ārammaṇa Plays a Critical Role in a Sensory Event.”
Regarding the “data system analogy” of Lang:
It is a simple analogy that cannot be taken too literally.
- The data must be “stored” in a physical device, I guess. In that sense, it involves a device in the physical world. That is why analogies are not perfect, especially when we try to imagine a “mental process.” But Lang’s description of retrieval is a good idea.
- The “storage of namagotta” as the three mental aggregates (in vinnana dhatu) does not have a perfect analogy in the rupa loka.
- Also, note that only rupas (above the suddhatthaka stage) are in the “rupa loka.” Namagotta and dhammā (with energies below the suddhatthaka stage) are in vinnana dhatu or “nama loka.” See #4 through #6 in “Rupa and Rupakkhandha, Nāma and Nāmagotta” We cannot analyze the characteristics of vinnana dhatu or “nama loka” with terminology/examples in “rupa loka.”
- This is a complex subject. It is not necessary to understand it to attain Nibbana. I discussed it because many ask, “Where are memories stored?” OR “How can kamma bring their vipaka? Where are those kammic energies stored?” etc. Buddha Dhamma is the ultimate science. Modern science is far behind.
3 users thanked author for this post.
