[Lal]

Hello Dipo,

1. Yes. I also did quite a bit of that many years ago. I still try to keep up with it just to see their progress. They have not made any progress since then.

– Colin McGinn, Thomas Nagel, and David Chalmers are philosophers who have realized that consciousness cannot arise in the brain. Chalmers famously coined the term “hard problem in consciousness” (how can matter give rise to mental phenomena).

2. There is a trace of matter that DOES give rise to consciousness, and that is the hadaya vatthu that I mentioned above. That unimaginably small “seat of the mind” (much smaller than an atom in modern science) is created by kammic energy.
– What they call Artificial Intelligence (AI) is just fancy computer programs. As someone said, it is AI without the “I” (intelligence). They can get things done faster, but there will NEVER be a “conscious robot.” For example, how can the feeling of pain or joy arise in a machine? That is the “hard problem of consciousness.”
– That hadaya vatthu also has a finite lifetime. But before it dies, enough kammic energy to generate many more such hadaya vatthu (corresponding to different realms) are created by javana citta that arise in hadaya vatthu. Those can be called “kamma bija” or seeds for future hadaya vatthu
– In the last citta vithi of a hadaya vatthu, one of those kamma seeds is grasped and becomes “active,” and the lifestream continues. Only an Arahant would not grasp any kamma seed. That is how the rebirth process comes to an end.
– That is a very brief description. Abhidhamma describes that in great detail.

3. The problem is that none of those philosophers know that such a description exists. Even if someone told them, I don’t know whether they will be receptive to spending time learning Abhidhamma.
– Abhidhamma is the ultimate theory of the mind.

4. However, one can attain Nibbana without learning Abhidhamma. If the basic concepts of the Four Noble Truths/Paticca Samuppada/Tilakkhana are understood, one can become a Sotapanna and then make further progress. Those three approaches get one to the same understanding.

Finally, I am sorry to hear about your medical condition. You seem to be coping well. I, too, live a simple life.

[Lal]

Hello Dipo,

In my opinion, reading the works of Roger Penrose, etc., in the present day to Aristotle, Plato and Socrates will not clarify the origin of consciousness. The bottom line is that consciousness CAN NOT arise from inert matter. But, of course, each person is entitled to whatever they want to do.

Dipo asked: “But, I must ask what sources do you rely on for deciphering the true meaning of the Pali language?”

1. The question should be, “But, I must ask what sources you rely on to learn Buddha Dhamma?”
– Learning Buddha Dhamma cannot be equated to learning Pali. One can be an expert in the Pali language and be totally ignorant of the teachings of the Buddha. Tipitaka suttas are in summary form. They MUST BE explained in detail. That is why the current word-by-word translations are mostly useless. Not only are they useless, but they lead to confusion. I have referred to one post that I wrote on that, but I regularly point out more examples in my posts.
– As I explained, I learned Buddha Dhamma from Waharaka Thero. I learned the Pali language on my own. It does help a lot that the Sinhala language is very similar to Pali.
– At some point, it would be very beneficial to learn Pali. Once one has a basic understanding of Buddha Dhamma, it is easier to learn Pali.

2. Learning the Pali language and learning Buddha Dhamma are two different things.
– If one needs to learn Buddha Dhamma from the Tipitaka, then one needs to learn Pali.
– However, even if one is an absolute scholar of the Pali language that DOES NOT mean he/she will have a good understanding of Buddha Dhamma by reading the Tipitaka. One MUST learn the basics of Buddha Dhamma from the Buddha himself or a true disciple of the Buddha who has attained a magga phala.
– Think about it this way: Suppose there is a person who has excellent knowledge of English and German languages. If he is not a scientist, will he be able to translate a science textbook from English to German?
– That is the current situation in translating Tipitaka Pali suttas to English. Most of the translators have no understanding of Buddha Dhamma. They translate Tipitaka texts word-by-word (using unreliable dictionaries). That only leads to confusion. That is apparent in any online discussion group like Dhamma Wheel or Discuss & Discover.

3. One NEEDS TO be able to learn Buddha Dhamma from a Noble Person who has UNDERSTOOD Buddha Dhamma to some level.
– Of course, the critical issue is determining whether a given translator has such qualifications.
– The only way to sort out good teachers from bad ones is to check whether their teachings are self-consistent AND always compatible with the Tipitaka.
– The latter measure cannot be used until one learns the Pali language. But anyone should be able to see the inconsistencies WITHIN most of the English translations. I have given many examples.
– I always encourage anyone to point out any inconsistencies within my website. There could be (and have been) minor errors, and I have been able to fix them.

4. So it is good to have some knowledge of Pali. If one has a good knowledge of Pali, one would be able to check for the inconsistencies with the Tipitaka on one’s own.
– I have already stated that translations at Sutta Central and also Pali Text Society (PTS) have many inaccuracies. TamilCube does not have Pali resources, to my knowledge. It has Sanskrit, but the Buddha prohibited using the Sanskrit language to convey Buddha Dhamma. That is because Sanskrit has some words like anitya and anatma that many people equate with anicca and anatta (they sound similar but have very different meanings).
– A Pali dictionary that I use is “Concise Pali-English Dictionary“. This also has some errors.

5. Now, let me give some posts on a few Pali keywords to look up if you are interested:
– Tanha: “Kāma Tanhā, Bhava Tanhā, Vibhava Tanhā”
– Sanna: “Saññā – What It Really Means”
– Sankhara: “Saṅkhāra – What It Really Means”
– Please feel free to ask questions.

[Lal]

I was going to suggest some posts for Dipo to read on the terms in Paticca Samuppada (sankhara, vinnana, etc.). Then I saw that Lang has commented on your questions about arammana. So, let me comment a bit more on that first. I will suggest those posts on the other Pali words tomorrow.

Dipo quoted:

“New Concise Pali English Dictionary
ārammaṇa: neuter basis, starting point (for producing or initiating activity), footing; basis of meditation; object, object of consideration, sense-object

PTS Pali English Dictionary

Ārammaṇa: neuter primary meaning “foundation”, from this applied in the following: senses: support, help, footing, expedient, anything to be depended upon as a means of achieving what is desired, i.e. basis of operation, chance Snp verse 1069 (= ālambana, nissaya, upanissaya Cnd.132); Pv.4:1 (yaṁ kiñc’ ārammaṇaṁ katvā) ārammaṇaṁ labhati (+ otāraṁ labhati) to get the chance SN.ii.268; SN.iv.185; condition, ground, cause, means esp. a cause of desire or clinging to life, pl. -ā causes of rebirth (interpreted by taṇhā at Mnd.429), lust Snp verse 474 (= paccayā Snp-a.410), Snp verse 945 (= Mnd.429); Kp-a.23; Dhp-a.i.288 (sappāy˚); Pv-a.279

***

This is a good example of the problem we are facing today. Those dictionaries were written by the early European scholars who tried their best to interpret the vast Pali literature they came across in Sri Lanka and other Asian countries in the early 1800s.
– At that time, Buddha Dhamma (Buddhism) was in a very bad state as I described in “Elephant in the Room” – Direct Translation of the Tipiṭaka.”
– Those European scholars learned Pali (and Sanskrit) from the locals. As I mentioned, there were no bhikkhus or any other scholars with good knowledge of Buddha Dhamma or Pali.
– Thus, SOME of the explanations in the dictionaries that you quote are not quite correct. For example, they translate “vinnana” as “consciousness.” But “vinnana” can have different meanings depending on the context. I will give you some posts to read tomorrow.
– P.S. It was Waharaka Thero (my late teacher) who provided correct interpretations of those words. How can we know that they are the correct interpretations? They lead to self-consistency within the Tipitaka. There are many inconsistencies with other interpretations/translations, as I pointed out in MANY posts, including the above-mentioned post. Also see, “Parinibbāna of Waharaka Thēro.”

Arammana is another word that is not translated correctly. As I try to emphasize, it is better to learn the Pali word’s meaning and use it rather than trying to translate it. Many Pali words CAN NOT be translated as single English words: Anicca, anatta, sankhara, vinnana…etc.
– Arammana is simply a sensory input that grabs your attention. It can come through one of the five physical senses (eyes, ears, nose, tongue, body touch) or the sixth one, the mind (memory recall.)
– The best way to find relevant posts on a word(s) is to use the “Search box’ labeled “Enter Keyword” on the top right. I did that, and here is the result for “arammana”:
“Search Results for: arammana”
– The very first post is a good one to start. Scan through others also and get a feel for it. Feel free to ask questions if not clear.

[Lal]

I appreciate your effort, Dipo. Thank you, Lang, for providing valuable input.

It is just that I have been somewhat frustrated with another discussion forum recently. I have been trying to explain certain problems with the current status of Buddha Dhamma. Most texts in English are quite wrong. But even the moderators at that forum seem to be incapable of seeing the obvious problems in English translations. See “Distortion of Pāli Keywords in Paṭicca Samuppāda.”

Anyway, I will think about how to clarify certain concepts relevant to the present discussion in more detail and provide links to some more relevant posts.
– Dipo: In the meantime, please read up on the posts that I referred to earlier and the ones that Lang mentioned. We appreciate your efforts and will do our best to help. As you realized, it is important to understand some basic concepts that have been misinterpreted for so long. It is not your fault.

[Lal]

“So, then if I understand you correctly, in the case of Angulimala, his previous life strong arammana, which negatively influenced his kamma, became washed away by the fact that he was able to overcome very strong avijja, ..”

I don’t think that makes any sense. You are not taking the time to read and understand what I write.

[Lal]

The key issue is how a hadaya vatthu arises for a given existence. It is explained in Paticca Samuppada (PS):

1. A hadaya vatthu for a future existence arises due to a specific kammic energy created in this life or previous lives. Let us take my hadaya vatthu.

2. When I die, my gandhabba (with hadaya vatthu) will come out of my physical body. Then it will wait in that gandhabba state until pulled into a matching womb, and I will be reborn to have a different human body. That process will continue until the lifetime of my hadaya vatthu is exhausted.

3. At that point, the last citta vithi from this hadaya vatthu will run, which will be focused on an arammana corresponding to the STRONGEST kamma from my past.
– Suppose I had killed another human being. That arammana would give rise to an existence in an apaya (one of the four lowest realms). But my mind WILL NOT grasp that bhava (existence) IF I have attained a magga phala. If I did not have a magga phala, then the mind would AUTOMATICALLY grasp that existence. That is the “upadana paccaya bhava” step in Uppatti PS.

4. I would have killed that human either in this life or a previous life (of course, this is just an example) via (abhi)sankhara that arose due to avijja: “avijja paccaya sankhara” in PS.

5. Of course, I would have done that ONLY IF there was a strong arammana that induced strong greed or anger (with avijja) at that time.
– That is why I have explained that the PS cycle does not start at “avijja paccaya sankhara.” One starts acting with avijja ONLY IF one gets attached to an arammana.
– I have tried to explain that in the recent series of posts: “Paṭicca Samuppāda During a Lifetime.”
– That description is for Idappaccayātā Paṭicca Samuppāda. But the sequence of events is the same for grasping an “uppatti bhava” or a brand new existence in another realm. Idappaccayātā Paṭicca Samuppāda explains “temporary bhava” grasped during a lifetime.

6. The bottom line is that brand new hadaya vatthu can ONLY be created by kammic energy.
– An Arahant’s mind would not grasp any existence (bhava) within the 31 realms. Thus, in Arahant’s last citta vithi, the Uppatti PS STOPS at the “upadana paccaya bhava” step. Thus, the next two steps (“bhava paccaya jati” and ‘jati paccaya jara, marana, soka, ..”) would not arise either. That is the end of suffering in the rebirth process.

[Lal]

Hello Dipo,

You wrote: “In February 2022 an article was published in Nature containing the first line:

“Understanding how consciousness arises from neural activity
remains one of the biggest challenges for neuroscience.”

My Comments:

1. That would be THE challenge IF one is working on the HYPOTHESIS, that consciousness MUST arise in the brain.
– There is ABSOULTELY NO EVIDENCE for this HYPOTHESIS.

2. However, Buddha Dhamma is BASED ON the HYPOTHESIS that consciousness can arise ONLY in a hadaya vatthu created by kammic energy. As we know, hadaya vatthu is the key element in a gandhabba.
– As I have explained, in Buddha Dhamma, the brain plays a role, but consciousness DOES NOT arise in the brain.
– That is CONFIRMED by rebirth accounts by children all over the world. In recent years, EVEN MORE STRONG evidence has emerged from accounts of Nead-Death Experiences (NDE):
“Near-Death Experiences (NDE): Brain Is Not the Mind”
– These accounts show that, (i) there can be consciousness without a brain (NDE accounts), and (ii) consciousness can propagate through different lives (rebirth accounts) while the brain is limited to just one life.

3. Thus, one HYPOTHESIS from #1 and #2 above must be incorrect.
– There is no way for both to be true.

I would like to hear your thoughts.

[Lal]

Thanks, Dipo.

When I wrote, “I am just trying to get an idea of how to make an outline..” I did not mean writing an essay. I meant making suggestions on what to read on this website.
– It is not even possible to make a brief “outline”. Buddha Dhamma can be understood in different ways. In any approach, it will take time, and how much time will depend on the person. You may not need that much time, but only you can know that.
– The bottom line is that until one understands the Four Noble Truths, Paticca Samuppada, and Tilakkhana, one would not have a good understanding of Buddha dhamma. Those three are interrelated.

One set of essays is “Origin of Life”

Another approach is: “Paṭicca Samuppāda in Plain English”

I recently started on another: “Paṭicca Samuppāda During a Lifetime”

– You may want to scan through some of those topics and see whether they could be helpful.
– I can try to answer any questions that you may have.

P.S. I forgot to answer your question: ” I am curious to know the sutta associated with your mention: “The Buddha prohibited the use of the Sanskrit language to teach Buddha Dhamma.” That would be a useful sutta to know.”

See #9 of “Preservation of the Buddha Dhamma“. Probably a good idea to read the whole post.

[Lal]

I take back what I wrote above. It is not worthwhile to read this document. I read it, so let me explain why it is a waste of time.

1. The phrase, “Early Buddhist Texts” does not make any sense. Are there “Late Buddhist Texts”? If so, how can they be attributed to the Buddha?

2. All we need is those “Early Buddhist Texts” that can be attributed to the Buddha. We have a set of such texts and it is the Tipitaka.
– There may be other texts like the “Chinese Agama” texts, but those are mostly translations of the Pāli Tipitaka.

3. Rather than writing books about the authenticity of the “Early Buddhist Texts” there is an easy way to figure out the true teachings of the Buddha. That is to look for any inconsistencies WITHIN the Tipitaka. I have seen no such inconsistency so far.
– If anyone can point out an inconsistency within the Tipitaka, I would be happy to discuss it.
– If not, why waste time discussing the authenticity of “Early Buddhist Texts”?

4. Furthermore, the author is in no position to evaluate any texts on Buddha Dhamma, because he is totally ignorant of the key concepts of Buddha Dhamma.
– That is a bold statement to make. But I can prove it.

5. I was triggered on this point when I came to read the subsection entitled, “saṅkhāra: choices” on p. 34 of the book.
– In that section, he writes: “Theravada gives saṅkhāra a rather odd scope. There, it is said to mean“ all conditioned phenomena apart from the things covered in the other aggregates”.
– On the contrary, many suttas in the Tipitaka clearly describe what sankhara are.
– He should at least read the post, “Saṅkhāra – What It Really Means”
– If he does not know what saṅkhāra are, how can he have an understanding of Paṭicca Samuppāda?
– If he does not understand Paṭicca Samuppāda, he does not understand Buddha Dhamma. Period.

6. There is more. He does not understand what is meant by viññāṇa either.
– Read his translation of “Dutiyabodhi Sutta (Ud 1.2)“. That links has both the Pāli version and his translation.
– That sutta explains the “Paṭiloma Paṭicca Samuppāda” which is the “reverse of Paṭicca Samuppāda“.
– Whereas Paṭicca Samuppāda indicated how rebirths (and thus future suffering) arise via the generation of saṅkhāra with “avijjā paccayā saṅkhāra“, the “reverse of Paṭicca Samuppāda” states that future suffering will cease with the ceasing of the generation of saṅkhāra with avijjā, i.e., starting with “avijjā nirodhā saṅkhāra nirodho.”
– The relevant verse in the sutta is :”..avijjā nirodhā saṅkhāra nirodho, saṅkhāra nirodhā viññāṇa nirodho, viññāṇa nirodhā nāmarūpa nirodho, nāmarūpa nirodhā saḷāyatana nirodho, saḷāyatana nirodhā phassa nirodho, phassa nirodhā vedanā nirodho, vedanā nirodhā taṇhā nirodho, taṇhā nirodhā upādāna nirodho, upādāna nirodhā bhava nirodho, bhava nirodhā jāti nirodho, jāti nirodhā jarāmaraṇaṁ sokaparidevadukkhadomanassupāyāsā nirujjhanti. Evametassa kevalassa dukkhakkhandhassa nirodho hotī”ti.
– He translates that as: ” When ignorance ceases, choices cease. When choices cease, consciousness ceases. When consciousness ceases, name and form cease. When name and form cease, the six sense fields cease. When the six sense fields cease, contact ceases. When contact ceases, feeling ceases. When feeling ceases, craving ceases. When craving ceases, grasping ceases. When grasping ceases, continued existence ceases. When continued existence ceases, rebirth ceases. When rebirth ceases, old age and death, sorrow, lamentation, pain, sadness, and distress cease. That is how this entire mass of suffering ceases.”
– The Buddha removed ALL avijjā from his mind upon his attainment of the Buddhahood (Enlightenment). Did the Buddha stop making saṅkhāra in the next 45 years of his life as the Buddha?
– Furthermore, did the Buddha lose consciousness upon Enlightenment?
– He does not even understand that “viññāṇa nirodho” only refers to “kamma viññāṇa” and NOT “vipaka viññāṇa.”
– See, “Viññāṇa – Two Critical Meanings”

7. If someone does not understand saṅkhāra or viññāṇa, that person obviously is not qualified to write books about Buddha Dhamma!
– But I do refer to his translations in some of my posts because the side-by-side Pāli and English translations are convenient for many readers. Furthermore, some of his translations are fine, because those suttas do not discuss deep concepts. In the case of “deep suttas/verses” I always emphasize that they are not correct.

[Lal]

Thanks, y not.
– I was able to fix the link using your suggestion.

It is probably a good idea to analyze this document in detail. It would be useful to get the historical background right. Please feel free to comment on it.

[Lal]

Hello Dipo,

You wrote: “Another analogy I might use is that one’s Kammic (karmic) Profile is like an energy investment account. A person can make good/beneficial investments, and bad/un-beneficial investments to their portfolio. The overall dominant type of investments defines the account (profile). Compared to an account with mostly bad investments producing negative results, an account with good investments will produce positive results.”

1. That is a good outline.
– However, one CAN attain Nibbana (Arahanthood) while still having a lot of “bad investments” in the account.
– For example, Angulimala killed almost 1000 people and yet attained the Arahanthood within a couple of weeks of meeting the Buddha. The kammic energy that he had accumulated was still there. He simply would not “grasp” (upadana) such actions ever again because his mind was purified with the comprehension of Four Noble Truths/Paticca Samyppada/Tilallkana. See, “Account of Angulimāla – Many Insights to Buddha Dhamma”
– That is a different issue you may not yet understand. How familiar are you with Paticca Samuppada?

2. Karma is the Sanskrit word for kamma. It is better not use to use “karma” or any other Sanskrit words. The Buddha prohibited the use of the Sanskrit language to teach Buddha Dhamma. It has led to the current problem of interpreting “anicca” (Pali word) to be the same as “anitya” (a Sanskrit word meaning impermanence). Again, I am not sure how familiar you are with this issue either.

3. You wrote: “I look forward to this outline you mention.”

What outline are you referring to? I don’t think I talked about providing an outline.

4. By the way, I read a good part of your paper on “Is Buddhism Religion? Why it Matters”. I like it. You have spent a lot of time on it, and it explains why Buddha Dhamma is not a religion in a theistic sense.
– I wish more people would spend time as you do critically examining the teachings of the Buddha. Most “teachers” of Buddha Dhamma in the Western world today just translate deep suttas word by word (using outdated dictionaries) and that has produced awful results. See, “‘Elephant in the Room’ – Direct Translation of the Tipiṭaka.”
– I may be getting you to look at too many different aspects. Just pick those that get your attention the most.

[Lal]

Do things happen without causes?
– If there is no progress in understanding, it will not improve.

P.S. Unless one becomes at least a Sotapanna Anugami, any progress CAN even reverse. If we die before that, we don’t know where we will be born next. Even if it is in the human realm, one could be born into a “wrong family”.

[Lal]

Regarding the questions that you raised earlier, I will try to answer them in brief. I have already pointed out some references. Please don’t hesitate to ask questions if not clear.

1. Since energy can never be created or destroyed and is a fundamental constant in the Universe:
a. Consciousness must be a fundamental element of the Universe.
b. Kammic energy must also be a fundamental element of the Universe, but is more focused.

My comment:
Consciousness can arise only from a hadaya vatthu. Since grasping another “hadaya vatthu” stops with Nibbana, that “stream of consciousness” ends with the Parinibbana (death) of an Arahant.
– Once attaining Nibbana, a living Arahant would not create more kammic energy via javana citta.
– The most difficult thing for most people to understand is “why do you want the consciousness to stop arising?” The short answer is that as long as consciousness keeps arising (in different realms, via rebirth), most of those rebirths WILL BE in the four lowest realms (apayas). Understanding that is understanding the Noble Truth of Suffering!

2. Kammic energy is only possible with the convergence of consciousness and brain, which causes mind.

My comment:
NO. That I have explained. Consciousness can be there without a brain.

3. Gandhabba, a very small unit of energy, which is also subject to the Laws of the Conservation of Energy, is the wire, if you will, that allows the connection of “a” consciousness with “a” body (brain).

My comment:

Gandhabba (manomaya kaya) with the hadaya vatthu IS the source of consciousness.

4. Rebirth: It is the constancy of the energies of kamma, gandhabbha, mana, etc. that keeps the wheel of rebirth in operation, barring of course an intervention of nibbana.

My comment:

Yes.

Is gandhabba not the link, the gap, between “a” consciousness and “a” brain. Is the seat of the mind (hadaya yatthu) not in fact triggered by the gandhabba?

My comment:

Again, I have explained that now. The brain plays a role ONLY when the gandhabba is INSIDE the physical body. Data on NDE by heart surgeons provide evidence for that. Of course, numerous rebirth accounts provide evidence too.

[Lal]

As I wrote above, it increases with time as one’s understanding improves.

[Lal]

Regarding Yash’s question: “.. how one can know whether he has attained the sakadagami Stage?”

One will know that when one has lost the desire to POSSESS (own) material things that provide sensual pleasures. For example, houses, cars, paintings, …

But a Sakadagami has not yet REMOVED the tendency to enjoy such things.
– A Sakadagami needs to keep contemplating the “anicca nature” of such sensual pleasures.
– One WILL know when one gets there. One will not have the same tendencies to accumulate worldly possessions.

We discussed the key ideas in the thread on your question on the Anagami stage. You may want to re-read that. Until one starts giving up the craving for sensual pleasures, one is away from both Sakadagami and Anagami stages.

[Author]

Posts