Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
Yes. Sometimes it is hard for us to understand how kamma vipaka works.
- In the “Acinteyya Sutta (AN 4.77)“, the Buddha declared, “Kammavipāko, bhikkhave, acinteyyo, na cintetabbo“.
- It is one of four things that only a Buddha can fully comprehend, but any other cannot.
There is an account in the Tipitaka. Anathapindika was a wealthy person who built Jetavanaramaya for the Buddha, where the Buddha spent most of his life. During the dedication of Jetavanaramaya, a poor person was very much pleased with the event and was overcome by saddhā. He kept repeatedly saying, “Sādhu, Sādhu, Sādhu.” That is all he could do.
- It is said that both Anathapindika and that person were reborn in the same Deva realm when they died. But the poor person was born a more powerful Deva!
Four vipallasa (nicca, sukha, atta, subha) and three characteristics (anicca, dukkha, anatta.) There should be no confusion.
- I will take a look at the post. I have a few other ideas and might rewrite the post or write another one.
- What I am thinking is that asubha is associated only with the kama loka. Asubha vipallasa is removed at the Anagami stage.
- That means nicca and atta vipallasa may not be removed entirely at the Sotapanna stage.
- But I need some time to cross-check and make sure.
3 users thanked author for this post.
Yes. It is not quite correct to translate “kaya” as “action” (especially regarding the five aggregates.)
- “Kaya” in reference to the five aggregates almost always refers to those aggregates.
- This is a bit complex issue. I hesitated to comment on this. But as we know each aggregate, (for example the rupa aggregate) includes ALL past, future, and paccuppanna rupa ever experienced.
- See “The Five Aggregates (Pañcakkhandha)“
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.
