Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
OK. That is enough for this discussion.
- If there are unresolved Dhamma issues, anyone can ask questions.
- But please stop dragging personalities/institutions into the discussion.
I also disagree with the following statements: “as long as you have not renounced the lay life, you are not in a good position to criticize them” AND ““If one is really serious about attaining Nibbāna as quickly as possible one should take the robe immediately”
We can discuss the above statements (and the following statements I make).
- Becoming a bhikkhu is a personal decision. But bhikkhus represent the Buddha and we should respect them.
- “Sangha” does not mean bhikkhus, but Noble Persons with magga phala. Thus, some bhikkhus and some lay people belong to “Sangha.” The best example of a bhikkhu not belonging to Sangha is Devadatta. The majority of bhikkhus today do not belong to the “Sangha” category. “Bhikkhu Sangha” is the category of Noble Persons who are bhikkhus.
- Anyone should be able to criticize anyone else’s statements, but without being disrespectful. We can ask questions about a concept without talking about a person. If I write something wrong, please feel free to point it out. Anyone can make mistakes. Only a Buddha would not make a mistake.
2 users thanked author for this post.
“I’m not quite sure where I read this..”
“Now, if micca ditthi is a type of mano kamma and mano kamma arises from the first two javana citta in a citta vithi, wouldn’t this be a contradiction?”
- There is no contradiction.
- Mano kamma involves thoughts that arise automatically due to one’s unbroken samyojana. That is why those are the first javana cittas to arise. Thus, they are relatively weak.
- Each javana citta is strengthened by the previous one. Like a runner starting slowly, speeding up, and then slowing down at the end, javana cittas become weaker after the fifth. Thus, sixth and seventh javana cittas are progressively weaker.
- Thus, vaci and kaya abhisankhara are mostly associated with the javana citta #3 through #5 and weaken in #6 and #7.
- Kammic energy created in the first javana citta can bring vipaka in this life only. But #2 through #6 can bring vipaka in future lives, and #7 can bring vipaka only in the next life.
- That means javana citta #2 is strong enough to bring vipaka in future lives. But it is NOT ENOUGH to bring a rebirth (called “janaka kamma.”) Thus, kammic energy generated in javana citta #2 with mano sankhara can ONLY bring vipaka DURING A LIFE in future lives, i.e., it cannot give rise to a rebirth.
I explained that in a previous comment in the forum: “Reply To: Post on “Saṅkhāra – An Introduction”
P.S. Citta vithi explained in “Citta Vithi – Processing of Sense Inputs.”
2 users thanked author for this post.
Revised post: “Assāsa Passāsa – What Do They Mean?“
1 user thanked author for this post.
This discussion is getting too personal. Our goal is to learn Dhamma. It is better not to put down or promote teachers. Please stop doing either. Different people (including teachers) have different preferences/perspectives and are at varying levels of understanding. Only a Buddha can see anyone else’s level of understanding; we can only make guesses.
- If you have a question you would like to discuss, you can post it. If you can answer or provide helpful information on others’ questions, please do so, too. We all would appreciate that. Let us discuss Dhamma concepts, not teachers.
- If you had a specific experience or issue with a teacher, please don’t post names. If a problem is unresolved, you can ask the question without posting the source. Our goal is to learn Dhamma.
- I encourage everyone to follow teachers/instructors whom they like. There are many teachers out there. I have listed some (not a complete list) in “Parinibbāna of Waharaka Thēro.” You should learn from whoever is providing helpful information. It is a good idea to listen to/read from various teachers. You will automatically spend more time with your preferred teachers because you learn more from them.
- It is better not to be attached to a specific teacher other than the Buddha.
5 users thanked author for this post.
Jittananto wrote: “It is best to maintain respect for the Maha Sangha. “
- Did anyone do that?
- I may have missed that. Please quote from the above comments and say who it was.
It is good to hear that you are fully recovered, Yash.
- I will make some comments that could be helpful to the general audience. Some issues Yash raised are common.
Yash wrote: “I was confusing Nibbana as No Self and Annihilation without even realising it!”
1. This is a common confusion, especially since we frequently see “anatta” incorrectly translated as “no-self.”
- “Anatta” is not about a self. It is the third characteristic (feature) of everything about Nature. We pursue worldly things/pleasures with the wrong view/perception of “nicca” (pronounced “nichcha.” That means to engage in actions (with abhisankhara in mind) to pursue worldly pleasures. Such a view (ditthi) arises due to wrong perception (distorted sanna) about things in the world. Such pursuits only lead to more suffering in the future (dukkha). Thus, such efforts/actions are not fruitful and dangerous (anatta; pronounced “anaththa.”).
- That is how the three characteristics are related: anicca nature leads to dukkha, and at the end, when one is reborn in an apaya, one becomes helpless (anatta).
2. Even without the above mistranslation issue, the following is another problem. Whenever they hear that an Arahant will not be reborn, a sense of fear may arise in some: What will happen to me then? Will “I” disappear? Do I want that to happen to me?
- This is why it is better not to initially think about the Arahant stage. It is a step-by-step process.
- First, one must understand that craving for worldly things will only lead to suffering in the end. That may not happen to some in this life (we know drug dealers who live luxurious lives until they die.) That is why one cannot learn Buddha’s teachings without first seeing the validity of laws of kamma and the rebirth process.
- When one starts understanding the Paticca Samuppāda process, one realizes how each rebirth ends in suffering. Death is inevitable for any existence.
- That is when one slowly begins to realize that there is nothing like a “permanent soul.” Each rebirth is according to the types of kamma accumulated and prevailing conditions at the time of death.
- In this life one is human. But in the next life, it could be a Deva, Brahma, animal, or even a hell-being, depending on the type of kammic energies accumulated and the prevailing conditions.
- For example, Angulimala had accumulated enough kammic energy (in his last life itself) to be reborn in an apāya. But the meeting with Buddha changed the prevailing conditions. Within an hour after meeting the Buddha, he became a Sotapanna and that possibility disappeared. Then he became an Arahant within a few more weeks and the conditions for any rebirth disappeared (i.e., all ten samyojana were eliminated from his mind).
3. Thus, in the end it is the comprehension of the “true nature of the world” (yathābhuta ñāna) that leads to breaking the sansaric bonds (samyojana) and eliminating ANY future suffering.
- But getting there is a step-by-step process. It is a mistake to start with “what would happen to me at Arahanthod?” That question would not even arise as one progresses on the path.
- It starts with living a moral life and learning the “nature of the world” per the teachings of the Buddha. Then one would realize that everything in this world is a grand illusion based on “distorted saññā.” The perception of “me” or “I” is an illusion. However, just saying “I” or “me” doesn’t exist is insufficient (and could be dangerous, too). One must “see” that with wisdom (paññā.) It is also called “dhamma cakkhu.”
- It is not easy, but it is the only guaranteed way. One must be patient and follow the path step-by-step.
____________
P.S. I saw Christian’s comment after posting the above. It is quite correct.
- One must do a deep analysis to understand how “Venerable Arahant Culapanthaka became an Arahant.
OK. I will revise an old post to explain this. It may take a day or two.
1 user thanked author for this post.
No. The Thero does not advise to focus on a light.
- The English translation at the beginning can be misleading: “Be illuminated with the disintegration of desire.”
- The correct translation is: “Be released from the loka (aloka; commonly pronounced as āloka) with the disintegration of desire.”
- As you pointed out, “Aloka would mean transcending the loka, or Nibbana.” That is depicted in the following figure.
It is from “Pāth to Nibbāna – Learning Dhamma to Become a Sotapanna.”
_____
1. Of course, an anriya jhana can be cultivated by focusing on an object belonging to the world.
- Those are anariya kasina meditations. They focus on light (tejo), a clay ball (pathavi), breath (vayo), or a water bowl (apo).
____
2. There is a subtle connection to light, as pointed out by the Thero @1:20 minutes.
- Our minds are in the dark, covered by avijja, ignorance about the Noble Truths. “Seeing light” means dispelling that darkness of ignorance.
- As Thero pointed out, darkness is completely dispelled at Arahanthood. “The mind becomes illuminated.” That is not about a light.
- Once one becomes a Sotapanna (and comprehends the anicca nature), one can contemplate that “end result of Nibbana of an illuminated mind.”
- Another similar technique is to contemplate with the verse, “etaṃ santaṃ etaṃ paṇītaṃ yadidaṃ sabbasaṅkhārasamatho sabbūpadhipaṭinissaggo taṇhākkhayo virāgo nirodho nibbānan’ti” in the “Samādhi Sutta (AN 10.6)“. It is a good idea to read the whole sutta.
- But those are not about cultivating jhana. It is about progressing on the Path toward higher magga phala.
- @ 3 minutes, the Thero specifically says, “āloka means Nibbana.” That is translated in the video as “The light is one way of discerning Nibbana.” This is why some translations are not very reliable.
___
3. However, while in samadhi, one may feel a “lightness in the body” and even the presence of “white light.”
- Eventually all those go away. Light also belongs to the world (loka.)
1 user thanked author for this post.
Jittananto wrote: “Then, due to this brief Dhamma teaching of the Buddha, Bāhiya’s mind was right away freed from defilements by not grasping.”
- Ven. Bahiya was one of a kind. In fact, he was the only one capable of understanding the meaning of that short verse in all of Buddha Sasana. Probably Minister Santati was the second.
- Even Ven. Sariputta took two weeks to attain Arahantship.
- Despite all efforts, we are not aware of a single living Arahant these days. I wonder how many Sotapannas are there. Probably not that many. It is not easy.
It is not a good idea to compare Buddha’s teachings (and equate) with other religions or philosophies. That is my belief.
- A person with a hundred-year lifespan has a brief time to get to at least the Sotapanna stage.
- Spending time “praising each other” on common moral qualities among religions is a waste of time (of course, we should not condemn other religions either; but we can point out the enormous difference).
- The goal of Buddha Dhamma is not just to live a moral life (of course that is essential), but to at least glimpse the “ultimate truth” in the Four Noble Truths/Paticca Samuppada/Tilakkhana to attain the Sotapanna stage.
- That cannot be done by reading the Bible or Bhagavad Gita.
1 user thanked author for this post.
We have discussed enough the issue of “using sensitive words.”
- I believe all three of you are sincere about your intentions. We can resolve the issue by avoiding “sensitive” words in the future.
___________
Regarding the videos linked by Jttananto on March 4, 2025 at 5:17 pm.
First, I have listened to several Sinhala discourses by the Thero over the years. Of course, he has a good understanding of Buddha Dhamma.
- I was surprised to hear the specific quotes pointed out by Jittananto, and I believe those comments were intended to target a specific audience.
Jittananto wrote: “listen to this video from 13 min to 14 min”
- Nibbana sukha is not a happiness in the sense of a vedana felt. Of course, one would feel that type of vedana too, especially at the beginning (and while on the path).
- This must be a discourse delivered to children or beginners to the Buddha Dhamma.
In the second discourse (video), he says “one can find the truth in the Bible or the Bhagavad Gita.”
- That is not correct. Only a Buddha can discover the ultimate truth, and we have discussed this in many posts: “pubbe ananussutesu Dhammsu” or “previously unknown teachings.”
- Again, I am not sure what the objective of the discourse was. It may have been for beginners to the Buddha’s teachings.
Various teachers use different methods based on the audience.
1 user thanked author for this post.
We should not use words like “idiots” or “bastards” in the forum. Please refrain from using such offensive words.
- I had not read the whole thread, but now I have.
- I will watch the videos Jittananto suggested later.
2 users thanked author for this post.
“Most Venerable Bhante Nivanthapa Thero (Abbot of the monastery) told the audience, “Give me the bible, the Quran and the Bhagavad Gita, and I will show you Nibbāna.””
- Did he actually say that? Is that an accurate quote? It is hard to believe!
“The primary reason is that seismic waves don’t indicate the presence of a large liquid layer beneath the crust. If there were an ocean-like layer under the plates, we would expect clear seismic wave disruptions, but we don’t see this.”
- These are the same type of arguments based on mundane understanding (sañjānāti and vijānāti).
- It is best to spend time understanding that the basis of “modern science” is sañjānāti and vijānāti. I devote my time to Buddha’s teachings based on pajānāti, the true nature.
- I have no more comments on this subject. We have more important things to discuss. The point is that if the foundation is not solid, there is no point trying to “fix” (or “patch up”) the building built on that foundation. All mundane (including scientific) knowledge is based on “distorted saññā.” Time is better spent understanding how “distorted saññā” arises and its profound implications. Of course, it is not easy. It is a different paradigm. Even a few of my close friends don’t believe that and I no longer argue with them. I tried for years. Most are too focused on their “scientific work” and pay no attention to Buddha’s teachings; they don’t even have the time to “take a look.”
1. The problem is we tend to believe whatever science says. Of course, many things science says are true. But science is a “work in progress.” It keeps improving slowly. The following extract is from the post “Dhamma and Science – Introduction.”
“1. Even a few hundred years ago, scientists believed our Earth was the center of the universe: “Geocentric model.”
- Therefore, Buddha’s view of the universe as consisting of innumerable “world systems” was not looked at favorably even a few hundred years ago.
- Of course, that has changed now. Buddha’s statement that “there is no discernible beginning to life” is also becoming vindicated with each new scientific discovery.”
I discussed a few other examples in the post.
2. Taryal asked: “Is the translation above correct? If so, why does it say that the earthquake is caused due to the blowing wind when it is primarily the role of tectonic plates?”
- How do you (or scientists) know that the movement of tectonic plates could not be due to the shifting of a liquid mass underneath it?
- Scientists have not drilled far down enough to see what the Earth’s core is made of. I find the following: “The deepest hole scientists have drilled into the Earth is the Kola Superdeep Borehole in Russia. Located on the Kola Peninsula near the Arctic Circle, this scientific drilling project reached a depth of 12,262 meters (approximately 12.3 kilometers or 7.6 miles) in 1989. The borehole was part of a Soviet research effort started in 1970 to study the Earth’s crust and upper mantle.”
- Earth’s diameter is roughly 12,742 kilometers (7,918 miles).
- So, they have only “scratched the surface.”
- The Buddha did not provide any details, and I will not speculate. But my point is no one knows for sure. Yes. The shifting of tectonic plates could be the “immediate cause” But that could be due to the other reasons. We don’t know enough about the Earth’s core to say for sure.
3. There are deeper aspects to this discussion. I have discussed some in “Cognition Modes – Sañjānāti, Vijānāti, Pajānāti, Abhijānāti” because it is related to the concept of “distorted saññā.”
- All investigations by scientists are based on sañjānāti or vijānāti.
- However, the ultimate reality is different.
- As I pointed out before, Buddha Dhamma is based on a different set of axioms than science, which is why debates are useless.
- When one tries to understand Buddha Dhamma through “mundane logic,” that does not work. There is a paradigm change involved.
- This is summarized in the phrase “atakkāvacaraṁ” (beyond mundane logic/inquiry) in the “Ajāta Sutta (Iti 43)” that describes Nibbana.
4. In another example, we believe things around us are “solid.” However, even the hardest substance we know, diamond, is mostly “empty space.” Our eyes “see” things with a wavelength band that is a tiny fraction of the electromagnetic spectrum.
Dasa akusala kamma patha are listed in the “Saṅgīti Sutta (DN 33)“: “pāṇātipāto, adinnādānaṁ, kāmesumicchācāro, musāvādo, pisuṇā vācā, pharusā vācā, samphappalāpo, abhijjhā, byāpādo, micchādiṭṭhi.”
Dosakkhayo asked:
“A sotapanna may not always be able to discern whether someone is an arahant.
So, what if a sotapanna tries to swat a tiny mosquito but accidentally strikes an arahant instead, causing the arahant to fall, hit their head on a rock, and die? In this case, what kind of kamma would the sotapanna generate?
As far as I know, a sotapanna cannot generate the kamma of killing an arahant.
If this is true, is such a situation karmically prevented?
In other words, is it absolutely impossible for such a situation to even exist, where a sotapanna accidentally kills an arahant while trying to swat a mosquito?”
- Yes. A Sotapanna will be “naturally protected” from such an accident.
With the other example, Dosakkhayo asked: “Does this mean that a sotapanna cannot commit panatipata at all?”
- Sotapanna is capable of committing a killing (not likely to kill a human unless under extreme conditions). He is prevented from killing an Arahant or a parent even accidentally.
- The bottom line is that a Sotapanna is prevented from doing an anantariya kamma. That is a law of Nature. We cannot explain how that works.
From the Acinteyya Sutta (AN 4.77):
“There are four things that are not to be conjectured about, that could make one go mad (become a mental patient). Which four?
“The Buddha-range (i.e., Buddha’s knowledge) is unconjecturable and not to be conjectured about.
“Details of jhana (including supernormal powers that one can attain).
“The precise workings of the results of kamma.”
“Origins of the world.”
– These are the four things that are not to be investigated (because they are discernible only to the mind of Buddha), that would bring madness and confusion to anyone who tries to find everything about them.”3 users thanked author for this post.
