[Lal]

It is good to remember the two rules mentioned in #1 of my previous comment quoted below:

• The mundane (or conventional) usage is with attā, to indicate “a person.”
• In most other cases, all four words, atta, anatta, attā, and anattā, could be associated with the anatta lakkhana in Tilakkhana.

The second rule applies in “‘Cakkhu attā’ti yo vadeyya taṃ na upapajjāti. .” It rhymes better to say “Cakkhu attā’ti” rather than “Cakkhu atta’ti” just like in “vedanā anattā” (mentioned in my previous comment.)

• “‘cakkhu is beneficial‘ does not hold..”
• In this case, “cakkhu” means “cakkhayatana,” not physical eyes or cakkhu indriya. 
• “Cakkhayatana” is when one using cakkhu indriya as an “ayatana,” i.e., to enjoy sights. In the case of an Arahant, it is  always used as cakkhu indriya and not cakkhayatana.
• The difference between cakkhu indriya and cakkhayatana is explained in “How Do Sense Faculties Become Internal Āyatana?“

P.S. It is possible (in most cases) to get an idea of “which of the two rules should apply” in a given situation by reading through the whole sutta (taking a quick scan). 

1 user thanked author for this post.

pathfinder

[Lal]

I am rewriting an old post to explain different meanings of atta, anatta, attā, and anattā. The following is an extraction from it. Please ask any remaining questions so I can answer them in that post.

Introduction

1. It is crucial to understand the usage of the Pali words atta, anatta, attā, and anattā in the context of a given sutta. 

• The mundane (or conventional) usage is with attā, to indicate “a person.”
• In most other cases, all four words, atta, anatta, attā, and anattā, could be associated with the anatta lakkhana in Tilakkhana.

Attā as “a Person” 

2. The word “attā” (pronounced with a “long a at the end”) is used as “a person” only in the conventional sense. To communicate with others, we may say things like, “One needs to defend oneself.” Here, “a person” exists only in the conventional sense. In Sinhala, it is written as “අත්තා.” That is how it appears in the Pāli Tipiṭaka, written in Sinhala.

• There is no single Pāli word to express the negation of that, i.e., “not attā.” If there were to be such a word, that would be “non-person.” It just cannot be used that way.
• The other words to denote “me” or “self” are “mama,” “asmi,” or “mē.”
• Even though attā has this meaning as a “person,” anatta is never used as the opposite of that “attā.”
• Note that “attā” is pronounced with a “long a” as in “father.” 

Atta as “Beneficial” or “Meaningful”

3. The word “atta” (pronounced with a “short a at the end” as in “cut” or “but”) embeds several meanings, including “beneficial” or “with essence.” The negation is “anatta.”

• In Sinhala, they are written as “අත්ත” and “අනත්ත.” That is how they appear in the Pāli Tipiṭaka, written in Sinhala.
• Anatta is the negation of “atta“: “na” + atta” (which rhymes as “anatta“): there is no benefit/does not hold anything fruitful. 
• Such a word combination applies to “Anāgāmi” too. It comes from “na” + āgāmi” where “āgāmi” means “to come back; thus, “Anāgāmi” means “not coming back (to the kama loka).
• There also “na” + āgāmi” rhymes as “Anāgāmi.“

4. One who is engaged in things that are of “anatta nature” will become “anātha” (helpless), the opposite of “nātha.” As was mentioned in the post “Attā Hi Attanō Nāthō,” “nātha” is another word for Nibbāna.

• One trying to find refuge in this world will become truly helpless in the long run. On the other hand, the only refuge (“nātha“) is Nibbāna, i.e., overcoming the rebirth process.

5. Therefore, a critical mistake Is made by trying to translate anatta as the opposite of  “attā” with the conventional meaning of “a person” or “self.”

• The word anatta was ALWAYS used with the deep meaning of “no benefit or no essence.” Anatta indicates there is no benefit in seeking lasting happiness in this world of 31 realms. Sometimes, it is also written as “anattā” with a “long a,” as in “vedanā anattā.”
• As discussed above, attā ( in the conventional sense) indicates “a person.” The words atta, anatta, and anattā are never used in the context of that meaning.

[Lal]

It means something like “One who gives/feeds those who are poor/helpless.”

• Here “anātha” means “helpless,” and “piṇḍaka” means “food.”
• Also see “Attā Hi Attanō Nāthō.”

1 user thanked author for this post.

Waisaka

[Lal]

1. The following recent post could help get some ideas. I revised it a bit, too: “Etaṁ Mama, Esohamasmi, Eso Me Attā’ti – What Does It Mean?“

2. Also, “ā” can mean different things in different contexts. 

• It indicates plural for “things” or “people”; manusso is one person, and manussā is many people. 
• However, “anattā” is the same as “anatta.” It indicates the characteristic of anatta nature. It is mainly used as “anattā” because it rhymes better as in “vedanā anattā.”
• This is why I say we need to be careful with grammar.
• It may take some time to get used to these aspects.

1 user thanked author for this post.

pathfinder

[Lal]

1. Pathfinder: “Also, I haven’t been able to find ‘anatta’ (without long ā) as a standalone word in any sutta, so I don’t think that word exists, …”

• See “Anattadhamma Sutta (SN 23.18)” and “Anatta Sutta (SN 22.14)“
• Anicca, dukkha, and anatta are characteristics (lakkhana) as explained in “Anattalakkhaṇa Sutta (SN 22.59).”
• Of course, the English translations in those links are incorrect.

2. However, the anicca, dukkha, and anatta nature (of anything associated with our mental or physical bodies) leads to the conclusion that there is no unchanging “soul-type entity” (no permanent “self” or soul) that goes through the rebirth process.

• The error in my old post was also due to referring to that aspect. But that is not quite right. 

1 user thanked author for this post.

pathfinder

[Lal]

I did not realize that I had not updated that section of the post, even though I had made some revisions to #2 even recently. 

• I need to revise it. Sorry about the confusion.
•  I know that some old posts need revision. I should maybe start going through old posts and updating them before writing new ones. 
• Thanks for pointing it out.

1 user thanked author for this post.

pathfinder

[Lal]

Yes. You are correct in that case. I revised it as follows:

3. Pāli is a phonetic language. The Tipiṭaka was faithfully transmitted for hundreds of years because verses were formulated for easy memorization. Grammar rules are different in Pāli. That is clear in verses “Buddhaṃ Saranam gacchāmi” and “Dhamman Saranam gacchāmi,” for example.

• There is no apparent subject in the above verse. The first, of course, means, “I take refuge in the Buddha,” but “I” is missing in “Buddhaṃ Saranam gacchāmi”  because it is taken into account as “Buddhaṃ Saranam gacchāmi.”

1 user thanked author for this post.

pathfinder

[Lal]

First of all, ChatGPT learns “grammar” from what is fed to it by its programmers. See “Pāli Dictionaries – Are They Reliable?“

• Pali grammar is a complex subject. I don’t want to get into a discussion on that. Of course, I am not discouraging anyone from learning Pali (learning the meanings of critical Pali words is essential), but relying too much on “adopted grammar rules” could become a problem. 
• I suggest trying to understand a verse’s meaning in the context of a given sutta. 
• Of course, each person can decide how to proceed. 

As I see it, AI bots like ChatGPT are great resources but have limits. They are good at summarizing information. They can look through all available resources and summarize them. But we need to be careful because their capabilities are limited by the resources available to them (fed by their programmers).”Artificial intelligence” (AI) is a misnomer; there cannot be any “intelligence” in a computer program!

[Lal]

You wrote: “The sentence becomes ‘giving a gift of mental adornation and mental pre-requisites’ instead of ‘with a pre-requisite of a clear mind’. Meaning ‘we should give dhamma’ instead of previous interpretation ‘we should give with a clear mind'”

• Is the sutta about “giving dhamma” to another? In other words, is it about teaching Dhamma to others?
• My point was that the merits of giving depend on the giver’s mindset. I think the sutta also tried to convey that idea in the context of that sutta.
• Of course, giving Dhamma is the best giving!

[Lal]

I am glad to see that ChatGPT can analyze Pali grammar!

• But I don’t understand the point of this “analysis.” Does it change the meaning of the sutta (in a way different than I explained)?

[Lal]

Thank you, TGS. It makes it easier to find suttas.

[Lal]

1. “cittālaṅkāracittaparikkhāraṁ” = citta alaṅkāra citta parikkhāra; when combining two words, one ending in a and the other starting with a, the combined word has a “long a” or ā.

So, the Pali word there is “alaṅkāra.” The mundane meaning can be ‘ornament’ / ‘decoration’ but here, it refers to a citta devoid of defilements and also with comprehension of Tilakkhana/PS. 

• parikkhāra means more like “pre-requisite.”
• P.S. “Prerequisite” emphasizes a preceding condition or order, whereas “Requisite” speaks to the fundamental necessity of something.

2. Thus, “api ca kho cittālaṅkāracittaparikkhāraṁ dānaṁ deti” conveys the idea: “instead (compared to the dāna in the previous verses), with a “cleansed mind.” 

3. The same is stated in the “Paṭhamadāna Sutta (AN 8.31).”

• The word “parikkhāra” is correctly translated as “pre-requisite” in the “Subha Sutta (MN 99).”

[Lal]

I looked into the question 1 from Pathfinder on Cosmic Expansion:

I asked Grok (Elon Musks’ AI bot): Are there alternate explanations for the red shift measurements on the receding galaxies?

Answer:

Yes, while the prevailing explanation for the redshift of light from distant galaxies is the expanding universe model, there are indeed alternative theories and explanations for this phenomenon. Here are some of them:

1. Tired Light: This theory posits that photons lose energy as they travel through space due to interactions with matter or other photons, thereby shifting to longer (redder) wavelengths. This idea does not require the expansion of space and suggests that the universe might not be expanding but could be static or even contracting.
2. Quantum Effects: Some theories suggest quantum effects might cause redshift. For instance, the interaction of light with virtual particles in the vacuum could result in energy loss over vast distances.
3. Variable Speed of Light (VSL): Proponents of this theory argue that the speed of light might not be constant but could have been higher in the early universe. If light slowed down over time, this could explain redshift without needing expansion.
4. Plasma Redshift: Proposed by Halton Arp among others, this idea suggests that redshift might occur due to the interaction of photons with plasma in intergalactic space. This could potentially explain why some quasars appear redshifted but seem to be associated with much closer galaxies.
5. Gravitational Redshift: While normally associated with the gravitational field of massive objects like black holes, some models consider the cumulative effect of gravitational fields over cosmic distances might contribute to observed redshift.
6. Cosmic Fatigue: A less mainstream but intriguing idea where photons lose energy due to some intrinsic ‘fatigue’ over time and distance, not necessarily explained by current physics.
7. Modified Gravity Theories: Some theories modify general relativity to account for large-scale phenomena without dark matter or dark energy, which might also offer different interpretations of redshift.

Each of these alternative explanations has its challenges when it comes to explaining all astronomical observations comprehensively, particularly when compared to the Lambda-CDM model (which includes dark energy causing the acceleration of expansion). The standard model accounts for a wide range of observations, including the cosmic microwave background radiation, the abundance of light elements, and large-scale structure formation, in addition to redshift.

However, the exploration of these alternatives often pushes the boundaries of our understanding of physics, potentially opening up new avenues for research. They might not currently offer as cohesive an explanation as the expanding universe theory, but they highlight that science is an ever-evolving field where anomalies and alternative models can lead to significant breakthroughs or at least refine our understanding of the universe.

_________

Regarding Question 3: Cosmic Microwave Background (CMB) Radiation:

I asked: Could the microwave background be due to something other than the “Big Bang”? Are there alternate explanations?

Grok’s Answer:

Indeed, while the Cosmic Microwave Background (CMB) is widely accepted as relic radiation from the Big Bang, there have been alternative explanations proposed over the years for its origin. Here are some of those alternate theories:

1. Steady State Theory: Before the CMB was discovered, and even for some time afterward, the Steady State Theory was a contender. This theory proposed that the universe had no beginning as it is eternal, and new matter is created as the universe expands to maintain a constant density over time. The CMB could be explained as the result of matter creation processes or as the equilibrium temperature of a universe that’s infinitely old.
2. Infinite Universe Models: Some models, like those involving infinite or cyclic universes, might suggest that the CMB is simply the background temperature of an infinitely large universe, where over time, radiation and matter reach a sort of thermal equilibrium.
3. Tired Light Revisited: If we consider the “tired light” hypothesis, where photons lose energy over time due to interactions with intergalactic medium or other unknown phenomena, this could result in a universe where all light eventually red-shifts to the microwave spectrum, creating what we observe as the CMB.
4. Plasma Universe: Within plasma cosmology, which views the universe as being dominated by electromagnetic forces rather than gravity, the CMB might be explained by the thermal radiation from a pervasive cosmic plasma rather than from a singular event like the Big Bang.
5. Multiverse Hypotheses: In some multiverse scenarios, our observable universe could be a bubble in a much larger cosmos. The CMB could then be interpreted as the thermal radiation from the boundary of this bubble or from interactions with adjacent universes.
6. Alternative Cosmological Models: Some theories, like those involving varying physical constants over time, might suggest that what we perceive as the CMB could be the result of these changes affecting how radiation propagates through space over cosmic scales.
7. Quantum Zero-Point Radiation: Some fringe theories propose that the CMB could be a manifestation of quantum zero-point energy, where the universe itself has a non-zero energy state even at absolute zero temperature.

The challenge with many of these alternatives is that they often struggle to explain the detailed characteristics of the CMB, such as its spectrum, which is extraordinarily close to that of a blackbody, the slight variations in temperature (anisotropies) that correspond well with models of inflation and structure formation in the Big Bang theory, and its uniformity from all directions in the sky (isotropy).

However, these alternative explanations serve an important role in science. They push the boundaries of our understanding and invite rigorous testing and examination. They are crucial for ensuring that the Big Bang theory, and by extension, our understanding of the CMB, continue to be scrutinized and potentially refined or even overturned if new evidence strongly supports a different model.

While currently, the CMB’s characteristics, particularly its blackbody spectrum and the precise pattern of anisotropies, fit the Big Bang model exceptionally well, the scientific process always leaves room for new data or interpretations that could shift our understanding.

_______

I don’t think Question 2 is critical either way.

1 user thanked author for this post.

pathfinder

[Lal]

1. There is a danger in reconciling scientific measurements with Buddha’s teachings. 

• The main problem is with the assumption of a “Big Bang.” It does not make sense that all this “stuff” came into existence in one moment. It is a good idea to contemplate the immensity of the universe using the image of our Milky Way galaxy in #6 of the draft I posted above. There are billions of such galaxies in the universe.

2. If we accept that all matter has been created somehow in a ‘Big Bang,” what is the origin of matter (in an uncountable number of stars in all those galaxies)?

• Scientists have no clear explanation for this. They say they can calculate the universe’s evolution from a fraction of a second after the Big Bang, but physics cannot explain what happened before that moment.
• Of course, the “Big Bang Theory” has not yet been fully confirmed, even though most scientists believe it.
• Still, some scientists do not believe everything “popped up” suddenly in the Big Bang.  See, for example, “Endless Universe – Beyond the Big Bang” by P. J. Steinhardt and N. Turok (2007).
• By the way, English astronomer Fred Hoyle coined the term “Big Bang” to ridicule the concept. See “Fred Hoyle – Rejection of the Big Bang.”

3. Scientists are willing to discard their theories based on new evidence contradicting any given theory.

• I think the breaking point of the “Big Bang Theory” will be the discovery of stars or galaxies older than the supposed “age of the universe of 15 billion years.”
• Better telescopes can probe deeper into space. They are already finding some old stars born very close to the “Big Bang.”  Once they find even a single star older than 15 billion years, that would be the end of the theory. The only problem is that most stars blow up in supernova events as they age. I have not looked into it, but that may prevent a star from being older than 15 billion years. That may avoid the negation of the “Big Bang Theory.” That would be very unfortunate. 

4. The Buddha looked at the world from a different point of view. He was focused on the issue of suffering and realized that the principle of cause and effect naturally leads to the existence of a beginning-less rebirth process.

• Focusing on the behavior of inert matter (as scientists have) can lead to many technological advances. However, that does not accomplish anything regarding the issue of suffering. We can reap the benefits of technological advances as long as we live. If one is reborn as an animal after death, what good is that? We need to focus on the issue of suffering in the long term, not just while we are living this brief life as a human.
• The following old post discussed that point to some extent, “Complexity of Life and the Way to Seek “Good Rebirths.”
• Ancient yogis realized this problem and tried for rebirths in Brahma realms by cultivating jhanas. But the Buddha realized that it was also a “temporary solution.” Until the causes for the continuation of the rebirth process (raga, dosa, moha) are eliminated, suffering will not stop in the long run.

2 users thanked author for this post.

taryal, pathfinder

[Lal]

Yes. That was not quite correctly worded. I will think about how to revise that. They start remembering “getting together and enjoying the company of others.”

• It is not the same as the desire for sensory pleasures or kama raga.
• The desire for sensory pleasures comes gradually after they are reborn on the newly-formed Earth.

1 user thanked author for this post.

taryal

[Author]

Posts