[Lal]

Issues like this can be easily resolved by looking at what kind of actions will bring “bad consequences” in terms of kamma vipāka.

The following are the dasa akusala or the ten immoral deeds:

Bodily actions: killing, stealing, sexual misconduct
Speech: lying, slandering, harsh words, frivolous talk
Thoughts: greed, anger/hate, wrong views

As we can see meat-eating does not fall into any of them.

When you buy meat at the supermarket, that animal had been killed by someone else. That person had already done the “bad kamma.”
– The Buddha did not prohibit meat-eating (even for bhikkhus) because of that.

However, this is not an endorsement for eating meat.

By the way, a very potent bad kamma is to have wrong views. These include not believing in the laws of kamma, rebirth, etc.

P.S. This is not the correct forum for this question. The ‘General Forum” would have been better. Please pay attention to select the correct forum to post a question/comment.

[Lal]

I did not say it that way, Lvalio.
– Please read my post above.

Please write an email to me if it is still not clear.

P.S.
Tobias is referring to the set of discourses in “Waharaka Thero English Subs Discourse”

They are all in my post dated June 19, 2020, at 9:04 pm there.

[Lal]

Tobias questions:

1. In that post under #4 the word nirodha is explained: “…Nirōdha comes from nir+udaya, where “nir” means stop and “udaya” means “arise”. Thus nirōdha means to stop something from arising. …”
– Waharaka Thero explains it differently as “to stop rounding behind something, stopping the rotation of the cycle”. It is the opposite of “rodha”. I think this is the better explanation. Any thoughts?

Both usages for “nirodha” as “to stop something from arising” AND “stopping the rotation of the cycle” are correct. Which meaning is more applicable depends on the context.

A. As explained in #4 of “Nirōdha and Vaya – Two Different Concepts“, Nirōdha comes from “nir”+”udaya”, where “nir” means stop and “udaya” means “arise”. Thus nirōdha means stop something from arising.
– Particularly in Paticca Samuppada steps, this meaning is more applicable in the reverse of the steps. There we have for example, “bhava paccaya jati” step, and to stop jati from arising one needs to stop bhava, i.e., “bhava nirodha jati nirodho.”

B. In the stopping of the “cycle of rebirth”, nirodha is used to indicate the “stopping of that perpetual cycle”.
– This is explained in #13 of “Nibbāna – Is it Difficult to Understand?”

The Sinhala wording for what you stated above is, “නියරෝධ කරනවා කියන්යන් රවුේ හන එක නතර කරනවා. ඊට පස්යස් ඒක රවුම් හන්යන් නෑ. අන්න නතර වුනා.” (Thanks to Janith Fernando for sending me the Sinhala transcript; that made it much easier).
– It could be translated in the given context as, “nirodha means to stop going around in the rebirth cycle. When one stops acting with avijja, that stops the rebirth cycle. That is nirodha.”

Many key Pali words like anicca and anatta have similarly several meanings that are inter-related. For example, anatta can mean “without refuge” AND “without essence”.

2. Tobias starting line should read, “Also on page 7 of Waharaka Thero discourse No. 6..”
The Sinhala version of what Tobias quoted is: “යම් ධර්මයක් “සාං” තහවේ “සාං + උදය – සමුදය” සාං කියන්තන් යමක් එක්වීම, ස ස් වීම. උදාපවනවා නම්, සකස් පවමින් උදාපවනවා නම්, “සබ් ං තං” – ඒ සියල්ලම “නිතරෝධ ධම්මාං” – රවුම් ෙහන්න වටින ඒවො තනතමයි! “නැතිතවන සුලුයි” කිවුතවොේ වැරදියි!”

I would translate that as “…‘Sañ’+ udaya = Samudaya’. ‘Sañ’ means incorporation or adding. If something X arises due to Y, then X can be stopped from arising by stopping Y. Everything in the world (‘sabbam tam’) arise due to avijja. Therefore, everything can be stopped from arising, they are all ‘nirodha dhammam’, not worthy of pursuing. If we just say ‘nirodha dhammam’ means perishable, that is wrong. because that only refers to the decay and destruction of EXISTING THINGS..”
– That refers to the fueling of the samsaric journey with avijja. The Paticca Samuppada cycle starts with “avijja paccaya sankhara” and ends with “jati paccaya jara, marana, ..and the whole mass of suffering.” Everything that arises will decay and vanish at some point, but the rebirth cycle will continue with another bhava and jati. It is only when avijja is REMOVED (stopped from arising), that the rebirth process will come to an end.

3. Again this refers to discourse #6.

Your question comes up because the term “exists” may be interpreted by different people in different ways. Let me try to explain it this way.

The “eternalists” believe that a “soul” exists. That means a permanent existence.
– The “materialists” believe that a “soul” does not exist, i.e., there is no permanent entity to be called “me” that will go on living forever in one form or another. In this case, there is not even a rebirth process. The death of the physical body is the END.

The Buddha said both are wrong.

So, I would translate that portion that you quoted as following:
“…As the meaning of this phrase, we have been taught that, if some phenomena arise, all those are perishable. Whatever arisen, will decay and perish. That’s how it has been clarified (for nirodha). But that is not nirodha.
Existent is one extreme, nonexistent is the other extreme. Association with either of the extremes, will not facilitate enlightenment.
We do not take it as “someone exists”. That could mean existence forever. ‘Samudaya’ means arising, arising of “a person” for example. When that person dies, “another living-being” will arise due to causes created by that person. If we take it as something existent, that would lean towards eternalism. Something existent would mean something existing eternally. These are things that are forming out of causality. That process can be stopped by removing avijja. …”

In other words, there is a continuance of life after death. But that should not be called eternal life.
– As we discussed above, that process can be stopped. It is COMPLETELY stopped when Arahanthood is attained and that Arahant’s physical body dies (i.e., Parinibbana.) That is nirodha.
– But until that happens, there is existence in some form (in the 31 realms).

It is not easy to express these concepts in words. But as we read more and more, we should be able to grasp the key ideas. As I explained, some words have different (but related) meanings.

[Lal]

It may take some time for me to look at the issues raised by Tobias and to respond. I had not gone through the transcriptions of the discourses other than the first one.

If anyone else has any questions on any of those transcriptions or need to comment on the above, please do so.

[Lal]

Tobias wrote to me and said he could not add the following THREE comments:

1. It is said on page 14/15 of the second discourse. I would also upload the file, but how?

2. Also on page 7 of Waharaka Thero discourse No. 7, it is said: “…‘Sañ’+ udaya = Samudaya’. ‘Sañ’ means union, formation. If something arises from formation, ‘sabbam tam’, all those are, ‘nirodha dhammam’, not worthy of pursuing. If we say ‘nirodha dhammam’ means perishable, that is wrong. …”

That refers to the verse: “Yam kiñci samudaya dhammam, sabbam tam nirodha dhammam”

Lal translated that verse in the post Ye Dhammā Hetuppabhavā.. and Yam Kiñci Samudaya Dhammam..
as “If there are dhammā that give rise to suffering (i.e., any samudaya dhammā), all such dhammā can be stopped from arising (via the Noble Eightfold Path).” (see #7 in that post)

Waharaka Thero translated this verse (summary from above): “If something arises from formation, all those are not worthy of pursuing.”

3. There is more to this on page 7 of discourse No. 7. Here the English translation:

“…As the meaning of this phrase, we have been taught that, if some phenomena arise, all those are perishable. Whatever arisen, will be lost. That’s how it has been clarified.
Existent is one extreme, nonexistent is the other extreme. Association with either of the extremes, will not facilitate enlightenment.
We do not take it as existent. ‘Samudaya’ means arising, arising of the formation, developing. If we take it as something existent, that would hint towards eternalism.
Something existent would mean something existing eternally. These are things that are forming out of causality. …”

Waharaka Thero says we shall avoid the extremes of existent and nonexistent. But he goes very far when he says that “existent means existing eternally”. Also, the word bhava is explained as “potential for existence” (somewhere on puredhamma.net).
I would agree on the view that things arise as formations. A normal person would take this formation as having a face value, which is not there. All we experience is made of satara maha butha with a ghost-like nature (and anicca nature). Therefore it is really of no value (anatta). That explanation does also not require the extremes of existent and nonexistent.

[Lal]

“Waharaka Thero explains it differently as “to stop rounding behind something, stopping the rotation of the cycle”. It is the opposite of “rodha”. I think this is the better explanation. ”

Exactly where does Waharaka Thero say that? I need to look at it before I can respond.
– The two explanations are inter-related. But the above statement needs to re-stated a bit differently.

[Lal]

Welcome to the forum, Ani!

[Lal]

I have discussed this issue in the post, “Four Conditions for Attaining Sōtapanna Magga/Phala“.

The latest information that I have is at #3 of that post, which I quote below:

“3. September 22, 2017: Previously, I had stated that one could learn about Tilakkhana by reading these days. That is still true and one could become a Sōtapanna anugāmi by reading.

– However, recently I came upon a dēsanā by the Waharaka Thēro which stated that a Sōtapanna anugāmi attains the Sōtapanna stage only while listening to a dēsanā by an Ariya (Noble person, i.e., one with at least the Sōtapanna stage).

– Apparently, a Sōtadvāra citta vithi of an Ariya (during a dēsanā) has the necessary javana power to act as a trigger. I am trying to find a Tipitaka reference, and I would appreciate receiving it from anyone who has that information. I will edit this post to include that reference when I find it.

– July 15, 2019: I still have not seen a definitive Tipitaka reference regarding this issue. However, all suttā on the conditions for attaining Sōtapanna stage list saddham­mas­savanaṃ (saddham­ma + savanaṃ or “listening to Dhamma”) as one condition, as in #1 above. Since written texts were not available at the time of the Buddha, this is not definitive as a condition.

– However, Waharaka Thēro has mentioned that listening to a recorded dēsanā should count, per his opinion.”

Here is another key point:
Listening is not required to attain the Sotapanna Anugāmi stage.
It is also clear that a Sotapanna Anugami is also freed from the apāyās. See, “Sōtapanna Anugāmi – No More Births in the Apāyās”

P.S. In other words, a Sotapanna Anugami is guaranteed to attain the Sotapanna stage.

[Lal]

Following is a brief explanation of the verse: “na, bhikkhave, buddhavacanaṃ chandaso āropetabbaṃ. Yo āropeyya, āpatti dukkaṭassa. Anujānāmi, bhikkhave, sakāya niruttiyā buddhavacanaṃ pariyāpuṇitun”ti”

chandaso = (convert to) Sanskrit verse,  āropetabbaṃ = I declare (as a Vinaya rule)

Yo āropeyya = whoever breaks that (Vinaya rule), āpatti dukkaṭassa = will be subjected to suffering

Anujānāmi = I give permission, sakāya niruttiyā buddhavacanaṃ = to provide meanings of Buddha Vacana (Buddha Dhamma) in one’s own dialect

pariyāpuṇitun = should learn well.

Therefore, the whole sentence can be translated as: “Bhikkhus, I declare that Buddha Dhamma should not be converted to Sanskrit verse (chandaso). Whoever breaks that Vinaya rule will be subjected to suffering. I give permission to express the meanings (nirutti) of Buddha Dhamma in one’s own dialect, to learn it well.”

The word “chandaso” as “Sanskrit verse” is stated in the following Wikipedia article too: “Sanskrit prosody”

From that article: “Sanskrit prosody or Chandas refers to one of the six Vedangas, or limbs of Vedic studies [1]. It is the study of poetic metres and verse in Sanskrit [1]. This field of study was central to the composition of the Vedas, the scriptural canons of Hinduism, so central that some later Hindu and Buddhist texts refer to the Vedas as Chandas [1,2].”

[Lal]

Added part 6 of the Series to Janith Fernando’s transcriptions of Waharaka Thero’s Desanas listed in my post on June 19, 2020, above.

[Lal]

Yes. This is the key point: “Comprehension of the anicca nature is different”

We are used to thinking about worldly things as “good” and “bad.”
– What the Buddha pointed it that just trying to do “good” will not keep us away from the rebirth process. “Good deeds” WILL get us rebirths in “good realms.” So, we MUST do good deeds.
– But the problem is that the mind CAN BE tempted to do “bad things.” That happens especially when one is born into a “bad environment” meaning bad family, bad friends, etc.
– We know that a child born into a “bad environment” has a high probability of ending up a criminal or drug addict.

That is really the “hidden suffering” pointed out by the Buddha.
– What we perceive as “good” is not “absolute.” It CANNOT be kept that way.
– So, if we do good deeds, we may be born a Deva. If we cultivate jhana, we may be born a Brahma. But those lives come to an end, and then we have no idea what will happen next.
– Furthermore, even if one lives a perfect life in this life, one may have bad kamma from previous lives waiting to bring a bad birth. That is part of anusaya.

As long as there is hidden anusaya, temptation to do “bad” (and the possibility of a bad rebirth) WILL BE there.

Those anusaya (hidden defilements) will be removed from a mind only when that picture becomes clear.
– That is when one “sees” the “anicca nature.”

[Lal]

Good question y not.

“What about those who change their gati without ever having heard of Buddhadhamma?”

Yes. We all have heard such instances where Buddha Dhamma is not involved. Especially, some criminals “come to their senses” in some cases and drastically change their behavior.
– Some people give up bad gati like smoking, drinking, or other bad lifestyles.

However, the point is that the root ignorance about the “true nature the world” cannot be removed without comprehending the “unfruitfulness” and “dangers” in the attachment to worldly things.
– A criminal changes for the better by seeing that his life could become even more miserable by continuing with the same actions/behavior.
– Same with those people who give smoking, drugs, etc.
– They would be just “looking for a better life.”

Comprehension of the anicca nature is different. Of course, giving up all those bad habits mentioned above is the first step.
– This is not an easy point to get across.

I recommend re-reading the first part of the following document where a large amount of hidden anusaya is removed by a Sotapanna: Waharaka Thero Discourse – The Way to Nibbana

[Lal]

August 1, 2020: There is a second series of Waharaka discourses with English subtitles by Waharak TV

Christian posted the first video of the series:

Universal Truth Exposure | Episode 01 – Know the Thilakuna

Patighosa Hojan (Hojanyun) sent me the next two videos of the series today (August 1, 2020):

Episode 02 – Know the Thilakuna | Universal Truth Exposure

Universal Truth Exposure | Episode 03

Patighosa Hojan (Hojanyun) sent me the fourth video of the series today (August 15, 2020):
Episode 04 | Understanding grief | With English Subtitles

Patighosa Hojan (Hojanyun) sent me the fifth video of the series today (September 11, 2020):
Episode 05 | World and its real suffering | With English Subtitles

Patighosa Hojan (Hojanyun) sent me the sixth video of the series today (September 22, 2020):
Episode 06 | Deceptive view of the world

[Lal]

Christian wrote: “..when we speak about Buddha’s meditation we always speak about Three marks, 8-fold Path, Paticca Samupadda etc.’

Yes. You can do that while in all four postures.
– In addition to contemplating on those (and even before being able to do that), one must get into the habit of being mindful of one’s actions. See the post referred below.

In Buddhist temples, there are walking paths. In some old temples, there are designated “walking paths” between two statues of a Buddha facing the walkway.

We need to remember that Anapanasati and Satipatthana meditations are supposed to be done at all times, especially to determine if one’s action is wise or not.
– See, “Kāyānupassanā – Section on Postures (Iriyāpathapabba)”

P.S. By the way, Ven. Ananda attained the Arahanthood while in none of the above four postures. He was contemplating a Dhamma concept while getting ready to go to bed. The phala moment came when he was in the process of lying down. He was not standing but had not got to the lying down position on the bed.
– So, he was contemplating that concept, and the “clarification” came in that particular instant where his feet were off the ground, but he had not yet fully landed on the bed!
– If anyone remembers the sutta, please post. If I come across it, I will post it here.

[Lal]

Hello Aniduan,

It is a short sutta, and the following is my translation:

“Bhikkhus, there are these five benefits of walking meditation. What five?
– One becomes capable of undertaking long journeys.
– Helps with making effort.
– Makes one healthy.
– It helps with the digestion of food.
– The level of concentration attained through walking meditation is long-lasting.

Those are the five benefits of walking meditation.”

Contrary to the perception that one needs to sit and stay like a statue during mediation is a myth.
– The Buddha said one should meditate in all four postures: sitting, standing, walking, and lying down.
– Depending on one’s activity, it is POSSIBLE to meditate in all four postures.
– Walking meditation is especially helpful after a meal or when one is feeling lethargic.

However, one needs to be prudent about it. For example, while driving one needs to fully concentrate on that, and NOT contemplate on anicca, dukkha, anatta!

[Author]

Posts