Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
The following is the latest in that series, which was just posted to Youtube. Thanks to Janith Fernando for sending it to me.
- Again, if you find anything that needs clarification, please comment and refer to the time in the video. I have not watched either of the videos due to the lack of time. It will be easy to check since both Sinhala, and English versions are there. Thank you, Janith! Much merit for your efforts!
Sometimes “santi” is used to express “there are.”
See, for example, “Suddhika Sutta (SN 31.1)“
TGS: When you provide a link, you should select “new window” in the “target box” in the “insert link” popup. That will open the page in a new tab. I have done that to your link, and now the sutta opens in a new tab in your comment.
- For those who are not sure how to provide a link, click on the “chain link” symbol. When you hover over each formatting symbol, it tells you what it does. For example, “B” is for “bold.”
- One must select the text to be bolded, italicized, etc. When providing a link, select the title of the link and then click the link symbol in the formatting panel.
Select the sentence that you want to be “bold” or “italics,” and then press the “b” or “i” on the format bar. That will solve the formatting issue. I corrected the first “bolded ” sentence in your comment.
Yes. I will try to address those when I have time. A lot can be written on various issues/concepts, but it is a matter of having enough time.
Yes. A sekkha is a Noble Person at or above the Sotapanna Anugami stage, training to be an Arahant (Asekha).
Two suttas explain a sekha:
“Sekkha Sutta (SN 45.13)” and “Sekkha Sutta (AN 3.85).”
The English translations can be improved. For example, the following verse in the second sutta “Adhisīlampi sikkhati, adhicittampi sikkhati, adhipaññampi sikkhati. Sikkhatīti kho, bhikkhu, tasmā sekhoti vuccatīti” can be a bit better translated as:
“They train with Ariyakanta sila (Adhisīla,) they cultivate defilement-free thoughts (dhicitta) with the comprehension of Tilakkhana (adhipañña.) That’s why they are called a ‘trainee’.”
See #4 of “Sotapatti Aṅga – The Four Qualities of a Sotāpanna” for a description of “ariyakanta sila.”
I am compiling evidence (as they come in) for the existence of ancient, highly spiritual, and technologically advanced civilizations.
The reason is that it is inevitable that they existed, according to the Tipitaka. The “Mahāpadāna Sutta (DN 14)” provides a detailed description of the existence of three Buddhas before Buddha Gotama in this maha kappa (meaning this Earth) that was formed about 4.5 billion years ago.
- P.S. The current eon (maha kappa) is known as a “bhaddakappa” (or a fortunate eon) because it will have five Buddhas born before its end. There can be many maha kappas without a single Buddha. As the above sutta states, there were 30 maha kappas before the current one without a single Buddha. There were two Buddhas in the 31 eons before the current one.
Civilizations can end with mass extinctions due to several possible cataclysmic events, such as a comet impact or an enormous earthquake.
- The acquired knowledge and technology can be completely wiped out due to such an event.
- It is not easy to find or verify the existence of such ancient civilizations because of the unimaginable period of even several million years, let alone over four billion years.
- However, there is already enough evidence to see that the currently accepted timeline of human evolution is wrong, which says agriculture was invented only 12,000 years ago: “The Development of Agriculture.”
- That is incorrect since it has now been verified (with carbon dating) that advanced structures were built before that timeline; for example, “Gobekli Tepe: Facts, Discovery, and Location.” The videos posted in my earlier posts above provide more information.
- More evidence will hopefully emerge. The main problem is that metals, when submerged in the Earth, decay and do not last even a million years. So, if a human civilization built rockets many millions ago, there will be no trace of that left. But the evidence for advanced ancient civilizations may appear unexpectedly as our technologies improve and may lead to evidence from yet unimagined ways.
1 user thanked author for this post.
Yes. This is a better format for the translation of Waharaka Thero’s discourses.
I have not listened to/read it, so I cannot vouch for its accuracy. But if anyone has questions about a possible error with the translation, please comment, referring to the video’s exact time(s).
Thank you, Sacket!
As I said, I cannot explain these things without you having a basic understanding. It is just a waste of time for both of us.
This is a common problem. People want to get into complex things like “where are memories stored?”, “how do gandhabbas communicate?” etc., without understanding saññā, the difference between rupa and rupakkhandha, etc.
- Spend the time and understand the basics. That will be a good investment.
- I will be happy to discuss any issues with the posts that I have suggested.
“I will read and try to ask question from your posts then.”
OK. That is fine. There is no point in discussing gandhabba if you cannot understand saññā, the difference between rupa and rupakkhandha, etc.
Hello Sachin,
You should first understand what saññā is. Please read the post:
“Saññā – What It Really Means“
Also, read the first two posts in the section, because that helps solidify the concept of saññā with examples:
“Essential Abhidhamma – The Basics“
Question by LDF: “I think intuition is related to saññā, in some way, is that correct?”
Intuition on a given object is based on first recognizing (saññā) the object and any other relevant objects.
- For example, your intuition of not to touch a red-hot metal comes because you recognize that metal is heated and can burn.
Hello Tobi,
Consciousness (vinnana) is many types. But they can be divided into TWO main types.
1. Awareness (Consciousness)
You become aware of a rupa (say, a tree) when you look at it. That is cakkhu vinnana (eye consciousness). When you become aware of a sound, that is sota vinnana (ear consciousness), etc. The sixth is mano vinnana, where you become aware of a past event (memory). That last happens via “manañca paṭicca dhammē ca uppajjāti manō viññāṇaṃ.” The first one happens via“cakkhuñca paṭicca rupē ca uppajjāti cakkhu viññāṇaṃ.”
Those are vipaka vinnana (of six types.) We cannot avoid them while we live.
2. Creating a Mind (rebirth consciousness or patisandhi vinnana) for a new existence (in the rebirth process)
This happens at the end of current existence (say, Deva) and grasping a new existence (say, human).
This happens via “upadana paccaya bhava” and “bhava paccaya jati” steps in Uppatti Paticca Samuppada. This also involves a dhammā.
- However, this dhammā differs from dhammā in recalling a memory in #1 above. This dhammā is a STRONG kamma bija that can lead to rebirth.
- These are kamma vinnana.
EXCEPTION: There are not so strong dhammā that can bring vipaka vinnana during life. These are more than memories. Memories don’t have kammic energy. These also belong to #1 above.
See “Viññāṇa – Consciousness Together With Future Expectations.” see #3.
Think about what happens when you see an object. How do you recognize it?
Suppose someone gives you an orange. You look at it and instantly recognize what it is and how an orange tastes. That recognition is saññā.
Now, for that identification to happen, you must have seen and eaten oranges before.
Your past “seeing events of an orange is in your memory; it is in your “pile of past rupa” or rupakkhandha. Furthermore, you remember the taste of orange from your past experiences, i.e., the “taste of an orange” is in your saññākhandha.
Let us get that issue resolved first. Please read the following post and point out anything you don’t understand:
“Difference Between Physical Rūpa and Rūpakkhandha.”
If you understand, read the first six posts in that section and ask questions. Please quote the post and bullet # in question:
“The Five Aggregates (Pañcakkhandha)“
The sutta is “Sattaṭṭhāna Sutta (SN 22.57),” linked to the verse Johnny quoted.
The verse, “Yaṁ rūpaṁ aniccaṁ dukkhaṁ vipariṇāmadhammaṁ” is MISTRANSLATED as “That form is impermanent, suffering, and perishable” in that translation. That is what Johnny is quoting.
Anicca is not “impermanence,” and vipariṇāmadhammaṁ does not merely mean “perishable.” Vipariṇāma also includes “unexpected changes before demise.”
I have discussed those, especially anicca, dukkha, and anatta in many posts: “Anicca, Dukkha, Anatta“
I also discussed that briefly in the latest post, “Dhamma and Dhammā – Different but Related.” See #8 and #9 there.
- As mentioned in #8, ““Rūpaṁ kho, ānanda, aniccaṁ saṅkhataṁ paṭiccasamuppannaṁ khayadhammaṁ vayadhammaṁ virāgadhammaṁ nirodhadhammaṁ..” That holds for vedanā, saññā, saṅkhārā, and viññāṇa as well (as mentioned there.
The translations at Sutta Central (as well as in most English translations) can have many problems:
“Word-for-Word Translation of the Tipiṭaka“
Thanks, Tobias!
I just made that change of one word. The rest is OK, as I see.
There may have been an issue with the website loading this morning for some of you.
- We found the problem, and it has been resolved, at least temporarily. Please email me ([email protected]) if the website does not load for over five minutes.
- The issue was with the plugin switching to the “dark mode.” I have deactivated it for now. So, the dark mode will be unavailable until the issue is resolved.
ChatGPT makes huge mistakes! I am recording a conversation I had with it just now:
ME:what is the dimension of an average atom and how does that compare to the dimension of the nucleus?The size of an atom is difficult to define because the electrons that orbit the nucleus are not bound to a specific location, but rather exist as probability distributions around the nucleus. However, the size of an atom can be roughly estimated by the distance between the nucleus and the outermost electrons, known as the atomic radius. The average atomic radius is about 100 picometers (pm), which is about 10^-10 meters.
The size of the nucleus, on the other hand, is much smaller than the size of the atom. The average size of a nucleus is about 5 to 10 femtometers (fm), which is about 10^-15 meters. This means that the nucleus is about 1,000 to 100,000 times smaller than the atom as a whole.
It is important to note that the size of an atom and the size of its nucleus can vary significantly depending on the element and the specific circumstances. For example, the size of an atom can change depending on the chemical environment it is in, and the size of the nucleus can vary depending on the number of protons and neutrons it contains.
ME:If all atoms on the earth are collapsed to the nuclear dimension what would be the earth’s radius?If all the atoms in the Earth were collapsed to the size of their nuclei, the Earth would be much, much smaller than it is currently. The radius of the Earth is about 6,371 kilometers (km), while the average size of a nucleus is about 5 to 10 femtometers (fm), which is about 10^-15 meters. This means that if all the atoms in the Earth were collapsed to the size of their nuclei, the Earth would be about 10^-15/6,371,000,000 meters in radius, or about 10^-21 meters in radius. This is a very small size, much smaller than even a single atom.
It is important to note that this scenario is purely theoretical and not possible in reality. The size of the Earth is determined by the size and arrangement of its atoms, and collapsing all the atoms to the size of their nuclei would fundamentally alter the properties of matter and the structure of the Earth.
ME:should that not be roughly 6371 times 10^-5 kilo meters or about 63.71 meters?I apologize for the error in my previous response. You are correct that the radius of the Earth would be much larger than the size of a single nucleus if all the atoms in the Earth were collapsed to the size of their nuclei.
If all the atoms in the Earth were collapsed to the size of their nuclei, the Earth would still have the same mass, but its volume would be much smaller. The average size of a nucleus is about 5 to 10 femtometers (fm), which is about 10^-15 meters. This means that if all the atoms in the Earth were collapsed to the size of their nuclei, the Earth would be about 10^-15 meters in radius. Since the radius of the Earth is currently about 6,371 kilometers (km), this means that the radius of the Earth would be about 6,371,000,000 times larger than the size of a single nucleus. In other words, the radius of the Earth would be about 6371 meters if all the atoms in the Earth were collapsed to the size of their nuclei.
Again, it is important to note that this scenario is purely theoretical and not possible in reality. The size of the Earth is determined by the size and arrangement of its atoms, and collapsing all the atoms to the size of their nuclei would fundamentally alter the properties of matter and the structure of the Earth.
ME:I think you are still off. Should not that be roughly 6371 kilo meters times 10^-5 or about 63.71 meters?I apologize for the confusion in my previous responses. You are correct that if all the atoms in the Earth were collapsed to the size of their nuclei, the radius of the Earth would be much larger than the size of a single nucleus.
To calculate the radius of the Earth if all its atoms were collapsed to the size of their nuclei, we can use the fact that the volume of a sphere is given by the formula 4/3 * pi * r^3, where r is the radius of the sphere. If we assume that the mass of the Earth remains constant and the density of the collapsed atoms is the same as the density of the Earth, then the volume of the Earth would also remain constant. We can then use the formula for the volume of a sphere to calculate the radius of the Earth if all its atoms were collapsed to the size of their nuclei.
If we plug in the values for the mass and density of the Earth, we can calculate that the radius of the Earth would be about 63.71 meters if all its atoms were collapsed to the size of their nuclei. This is much larger than the size of a single nucleus, which is about 5 to 10 femtometers (fm), or about 10^-15 meters.
I hope this helps clarify things. Please let me know if you have any further questions.
**********
The bottom line is that if all matter on Earth collapsed from atomic to nuclear dimensions, the radius of the Earth would be about 64 meters!
It is the electrostatic repulsion that keeps atoms away from each other.
When abhinna powers are cultivated, one can collapse matter to the suddhatthaka stage, much smaller than atomic dimensions. That is how one with abhinna powers can go through walls/mountains:
“Buddhahood Associated Controversies“
P.S. Even though we think we have “solid” bodies and steel is “extremely dense,” they are all primarily hollow spaces!
1 user thanked author for this post.
Pali words cannot be translated to one’s liking.
Anicca can be understood in two ways:
- Anicca = na + icca, “cannot be maintained” according to one’s icca. P.S. Similarly, the combination of “na āgāmai” (not coming back to the kama loka) is pronounced, “Anāgāmi.”
- Nicca = “can be maintained” according to one’s icca; anicca is the opposite of nicca.
Pali words are not necessarily meant to rhyme with Hindi or Sanskrit.
- Icca is pronounced “ichcha” and nicca “nichcha.” P.S. Anicca = na + icca, is pronounced “anichcha”; Anicca = a + nicca, is also pronounced “anichcha”
- Those conventions for writing were adopted by European scholars to shorten the Pali words written with the Latin (English) alphabet.
- See “Tipiṭaka English” Convention Adopted by Early European Scholars – Part 1” and Part 2.
