Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
Yes. That is correct.
- That is also why an Arahant will not be reborn upon passing away, even if more kammic energy is left in the human bhava.
P. S. It is easy to remember this by using the following analogy. The essence of a human is its manomaya kaya (gandhabba.) The seat of the mind (hadaya vatthu) and the five pasada rupa that help sense the external world are in the gandhabba.
- That gandhabba is in a “protective shield” or the dense human body. That dense body can “shield” the gandhabba as long as the gandhabba is “bound to that body.” Upon the death of the dense body, gandhabba is released from it, and it cannot withstand anantariya kamma.
- It is similar to a heated coil (like those immersed in a water bath) protected by the water it is in. If you take a heated coil out of the water, it will burn instantly. An anantariya kamma (good or bad) “heats” the gandhabba.
- Note that an Arahant with iddhi powers (or a Buddha) can come out of the dense body without passing away. Until Parinibbana, that gandhabba is bound to the dense physical body.
1 user thanked author for this post.
1. We can sort things out by looking at the following sutta: “Paṭhamabhava Sutta (AN 3.76).”
The key verse is: “Iti kho, ānanda, kammaṁ khettaṁ, viññāṇaṁ bījaṁ, taṇhā sneho.”
It is insufficiently (mechanically) translated there as: ” So, Ānanda, deeds are the field, consciousness is the seed, and craving is the moisture.”
The correct translation: “So, Ānanda, deeds are the field, kamma viññāṇa (kamma bija) is the seed, and craving is the moisture.
Such kamma bija may have been created long ago (with kamma viññāṇa.) Such kammic energies (kamma bija) accumulate over time and can lead to vipāka during life or even rebirths (with paṭisandhi viññāṇa.)
- Viññāṇa is a complex word. One needs to sort out the meaning per context.
2. Now, we can compare a kamma bija to an ordinary seed. A seed can remain without giving rise to a tree for a long time if kept in a cool, dry place.
- However, if that seed is planted in a field and provided with water (moisture), it will germinate and grow into a tree.
- In the above analogy, the Buddha pointed out that a kamma bija may stay in viññāṇa dhātu for a long time without bringing their fruits.
- It is when we attach (taṇhā) to an ārammana (sensory input) and start doing kamma (with abhisaṅkhāra) that we make CONDITIONS for such kamma bija to bring vipāka.
P.S.
3. Some strong kamma do not require suitable CONDITIONS to bring vipāka. They are the anantariya kamma. They will inevitably bring vipāka.
P.P.S.
4. The above discussion refers only to vipāka that bring rebirths.
- In general, vipāka during a lifetime can occur as long as there is a physical body to bring vipāka.
- That is why even the Buddha suffered from some ailments.
- Furthermore, even seeing, hearing, etc., are vipāka in general!
- Many unpleasant vipāka during a lifetime can be avoided by not making CONDITIONS for them to appear. For example, going to a crime-ridden neighborhood at night is making conditions to bring vipāka. Eating junk food also creates conditions to bring vipāka (in the form of sicknesses.) We can think of many such examples.
2 users thanked author for this post.
The meanings of that can be grasped by start reading the previous verse:
The English translation is there is good until it gets to the verse you quoted, “anatthaṁ me acari, taṁ kutettha labbhā’ti āghātaṁ paṭivineti;.”
It is translated there as, “Thinking: ‘They did wrong to me, but what can I possibly do?’ you get rid of resentment.”
The bolded part of the translation is wrong.
- One must realize that any wrong one is subjected to comes from previous causes. Those who brought such abuses on you were only the “agents” bringing such abuses/suffering.
- It is a hetu/phala process described by Paticca Samuppada. As long as there are past causes (and present conditions) to bring their fruits, they will come.
- Ven. Moggalana was beaten to death. That was not because of what he did. It is a vipaka coming from previous deeds.
- Once one understands that, one will bear any unavoidable vipaka with equanimity (upekkha.) Thus, one must also NOT take kamma vipaka to be deterministic. Ven. Moggalana escaped from those people twice. The third time they came for him, he looked back at the cause and saw that it was an unavoidable vipaka from a trace of anantariya kamma left from long ago.
The correct translation is, “Thinking: ‘They did wrong to me, but that is only a result of a previous (unavoidable) kamma, you get rid of resentment.”
- We can avoid many kamma vipaka by taking precautions NOT TO create suitable conditions for (numerous) previous kamma from previous lives to bring their vipaka. As long as they are not traces of anantariya kamma, we can avoid most of them by living a moral life, avoiding confrontations, exercising, eating well, etc.
- See “What is Kamma? – Is Everything Determined by Kamma?”
Many suttas explain that “this body is not yours; not someone else’s either.” It is a “hetu/phala.”
- See, for example, “Natumha Sutta (SN 12.37).”
3 users thanked author for this post.
Again, it is better not to say they don’t exist.
- They exist until the (mental) energy that produces them is exhausted. Furthermore, they can only lead to further suffering.
- If things don’t exist, they cannot bring suffering!
It is one extreme to say things exist (which gives a sense of permanence/stability or “nicca nature”), but it is the other extreme to say things do not exist.
- Vinnana is a “magician” because it presents a “nicca nature.”
- That second extreme is nihilism or uccheda ditthi. The first is sassata ditthi.
- “Discarding both extremes, the Tathagata teaches the middle way.”
#1 and #2: It is not quite right to say “..things that do not really exist in reality more than a figment of the imagination of the mind”
- Things do exist in a sense, but they all have finite existences, i.e., death (destruction) is built-in with the birth of living or inert things. Furthermore, they undergo unexpected changes during their existence.
- The correct interpretation is the following: It is incorrect to say things don’t exist, but it is also incorrect to say things don’t exist; things exist as long as the sustaining dhammas (with a long a) have not run out of energy.
- See “Kaccānagotta Sutta (SN 12.15)“
#3 is correct.
1 user thanked author for this post.
Excellent analysis, LDF.
- Of course, as Lang emphasized, “pleasure” in LDF’s analysis is “mind-made pleasure” or “somanassa vedana.” Furthermore, “mind-made suffering” or “domanassa vedana” arise if one is unable to get “somanassa vedana” fast enough!
Lang’s question: “If we get a chance to take care of an arahant, to help make his/her physical life as comfortable as possible, then it is of tremendous merits for us, correct?”
- Of course. Taking care of an Arahant will have merits far exceeding the merits of caring for anyone except a Buddha. As a general rule, the higher a human recipient’s (Noble) status, the higher the merit.
- The same works the other way too. Harming a Buddha or an Arahant will bring the highest vipaka, etc. It is not possible to take the life of a Buddha. Killing an Arahant is an anantariya papa kamma. Even though killing an average human will have less kammic consequences, killing a parent is an anantariya papa kamma too. That emphasizes the importance of taking care of one’s parents.
1 user thanked author for this post.
I think your questions have answers in the following. This is an excellent point to contemplate for all.
- In yathābhūta ñāna, “yathā” means “true nature,” and ñāna means wisdom. Thus, it means “wisdom about the true nature of this world made of four types of bhūta: pathavi, āpo, tējo, and vāyo.”
- Everything in this world (alive and inert) is made of bhūta. Bhuta is a Sinhala word as well as a Pāli word. It means a “ghost,” i.e., “not real.” That deeper meaning is associated with the four elemental “bhūta“: pathavi, āpo, tējo, and vāyo.
- As discussed in “The Origin of Matter – Suddhāṭṭhaka” these bhūta have origins in mind, specifically in javana citta. In summary, that means we live in a world made up by our minds and suffer immensely. That suffering goes away when one fully understands that.
I just revised the post, “Bhūta and Yathābhūta – What Do They Really Mean.”
- It is further explained in that post.
1 user thanked author for this post.
“#1 However, It is still bit unclear that why Ghana saññā is such a critical concept?”
I don’t think it is critical in the sense that one must comprehend that to make progress. It is one factor that can be helpful. Different people make a “breakthrough” with different approaches. This may help some.
- That should answer question #2.
“#3 Why is it said that one understands the world properly only when all ten saṃyojana are removed i.e. with arhant phala?“
- One would lose ALL attachments to this world only at the Arahant stage when one’s “yathabhuta nana” becomes complete.
- One loses attachment in stages as one’s understanding becomes more and more precise.
1 user thanked author for this post.
Yes. Those are Dhamma Niyama.
I think it is explained in the following sutta: “Paṭhamasikkhā Sutta (AN 3.86)“
“So do Anagamis’ body produce semen?”
As far as I know, only Arahant‘s bodies undergo these transformations.
- Their bones become indestructible “dhatu” (crystal-like) that don’t burn upon cremation of the body. That is how we have “dhatu” of the Buddha and various Arahants.
2 users thanked author for this post.
I am sure.
1. Arahants don’t engage in sexual acts, not by abstaining willfully from sex. It goes naturally with the understanding (wisdom) they have.
- Their bodies don’t produce semen.
2. Those yogis who abstain willfully from sex and cultivate jhana are born in Brahma realms. Those Brahmas cannot engage in sex either. They don’t even have sex organs.
1 user thanked author for this post.
I don’t think it is worthwhile discussing this subject. Of course, the Buddha would not talk about these things.
- The only relevant fact is that Arahants do not generate semen.
1 user thanked author for this post.
Yes. That is quite true.
Associating with sappurisa (moral people) is a crucial factor in being on the correct path to Nibbana.
- See “Avijjā Sutta (AN 10.61)“
In the same way, associating with asappurisa (immoral people) is a crucial factor in being on the wrong path away from Nibbana and cultivating avijjā leading to destruction.
- See “Avijjā Sutta (AN 10.61)“
It is good to contemplate things like this.
However, these are all “characteristics” (or “qualities” or “guna“) of Buddha Dhamma, not hetu/phala.
- Hetu and phala are described in Paticca Samuppada.
1 user thanked author for this post.
Of course. It does not matter whether they knew it was immoral or not.
- Laws of kamma apply whether there is a Buddha in the world or not.
2 users thanked author for this post.
