Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
Y not said: “If only we were able to always put ourselves in the shoes of ‘that other’ most of these questions would not even arise.”
That is really the bottom line. In fact, that was Buddha’s advise to the people of Kalama in the Kalama Sutta.
Put it in another way: Nibbana (cooling down), starting from the very basic level is to remove greed, hate, and ignorance (greed and hate arise due to ignorance).
- So, if a given action causes one to be uncomfortable that is due to greed, hate, ignorance arising. This is what is called “taapa” (or “heat”) in Satipatthana. One should avoid such actions.
- On the other hand, returning a lost item to the owner (whenever possible) is a non-greed, non-hate action done without ignorance. That always lead to joy in the heart in both people, opposite of taapa.
Both actions lead to cooling down of the mind.
Hi Akvan,
Of course, I knew that and I said so.
You said: “I was just trying to explain how in an ultimate (pramaththa) sense the ownership of things work. And also trying to explain how the ultimate (pramaththa) laws may defer from conventional and legal rules. .”
The conventional laws do not need to be different from ultimate (pramaththa) sense, especially in cases like ownership. If conventional law and order breaks down, we will have a chaotic situation. If one can just grab something from another, would not that lead to chaos?
The point is that when one makes progress on the Path, he/she will not care much if someone else takes things from him/her. The “sense of ownership” goes down. That is true. But we cannot impose that on the whole society, because law and order will break down.
I can see that the precept about “musavada” (making “adhamma as dhamma”) is different from “conventional lying”. But I don’t see how stealing can be justified in any way.
Because this involves breaking a very fundamental precept of not hurting another person: “In a similar way, if B steals something from A, say by grabbing his bag and running off, in the ultimate sense the ownership of that bag changes from A to B after the point that B takes hold of the bag. ”
“Panca upadanakhanda being compared to drinking the poison, seems to imply that suffering begins at the upadana stage(pulling object of greed/hatred closer), rather than beginning at the tanha stage(getting attached).”
- Yes. That is correct.
“Is there a deliberate reason why the Buddha called it “panca upadanakhanda” instead of “panca tanhakhanda?”
- The reason is in the above statement.
It is the upadana that we have control over, not tanha.
If it was tanha that leads to “bhava” WITHOUT having the upadana step in between, then no one will be able to attain Nibbana.
This is a VERY IMPORTANT point. If this is not clear to anyone: Please read the thread from the beginning and ask questions. Be specific what the sticking point is.
To put it in another way, attaining Nibbana is really about getting rid all gati, especially the “bad gati” in the beginning.
– When we get rid of a certain gati over time (by controlling upadana via controlling vaci and kaya sankhara), tanha associated with that gati will be removed eventually.
– One becomes free of the apayas by removing “apayagami gati” or “those gati that makes one do bad kamma that can lead to rebirth in the apayas”. That is the way to the Sotapanna stage. It becomes easier to get rid of”apayagami gati” when one starts grasping the anicca nature.Akvan said: “Let’s take an example where person A loses an object and drops it on the road. In the ultimate sense after A drops that object, he loses ownership of it and no one owns that object.”
Legally that is true.
However, that thing one may have dropped could be one’s wedding ring, or some critical and valuable thing over which one may lose sleep. It will be hugely beneficial to see if it can be returned to the owner.
As I said above, each case needs to be evaluated on its own. There is no need to worry about trying to return a dollar bill that one finds on the road.Akvan said: “In a similar way, if B steals something from A, say by grabbing his bag and running off, in the ultimate sense the ownership of that bag changes from A to B after the point that B takes hold of the bag. ”
That will not even hold legally.
That is a clear case of stealing or adinnadana. If that is not stealing, I don’t know what is. That is a very dangerous way of thinking. Of course, I know that Akvan does not act that way. But even to say that is not a good idea. Someone may latch on to that idea.y not said: ” it is hard to resist going back to enjoying something one likes(of course, in cases where you are thereby not harming any one else in any way). I myself cannot resist, to quote the example Upekkha gives, listening over and over again to a song I like. I see nothing wrong in it at all, per se..”
Perhaps it is easier to understand this difference between tanha and upadana by taking a more extreme example.
Suppose one trying to break the habit of taking drugs. Initially, when the urge comes (due to tanha), he may go along with more vaci snkhara and will get “worked up” to the point that it will be impossible for him to not to use it.
Suppose he gets better at resisting the drug use, but keeps thinking about it. He may be able to resist for longer times, but at some point he will not be able to resist. So, it is a bad idea to think that “just thinking about it not so bad”. If one is really motivated, one MUST at least keep reducing the time that one is “day dreaming about it”.
The Buddha explained it this way: One cannot live more than seven days without food AND water. One will die.
– But if one stops taking food, but takes in just water, one can live for several weeks.
– That is the analogy for killing a habit. If one stops BOTH kaya sankhara (actual act) and vaci sankhara (thinking about it), then one can kill the habit in a relatively short time.Breaking a habit involves stopping food (associated bodily actions or kaya sankhara) and water (vaci sankhara).
– So, one can break the habit of taking drugs in a shorter time (say a month) if he has the discipline to stop taking it AND also stop thinking about it.
– But if he stops taking the drug but goes on enjoying thinking about it (vaci sankhara), then he may go on without suing drugs for months and months, and one day he may lose the resolve and take the drug.
– In fact this happens to a lot of people who are trying to stop taking alcohol or even stop eating too much. They may temporarily stop those activities, but months later they break it. That is because they had not stopped generating vaci sankhara!Of course, I am not saying that listening to music is bad. But if one is working to get to the Anagami stage, that can be a hindrance. Of course, by that time one would have seen the “unfruitfullness” of listening to music. It is all relative. As I pointed out in a recent post, it is a step-by-step process to Nibbana.
“Day dreaming” or “not being mindful” involves thoughts that are related to greed, hate, and ignorance (lobha, dosa, moha or lower versions of them). That is the easiest way to think about it.
Focusing one’s mind on breath also belongs to the ignorance category.
Yes! I am really glad to see that you have grasped it correctly.
“So at the automatic mano sankhara stage, only tanha and attachment is there. There is no upadana at all in the mano sankhara stage?”
- That is rght. One may get attracted to something based on one’s current gati. Those mano sankhara arise automatically, as we discussed in the post, “Amazingly Fast Time Evolution of a Thought (Citta)“.
- Upadana or “pulling it closer” happens with vaci sankhara, when one consciously start thinking about how nice it would be to “get hold of that thing”, whatever it is.
- Even if one does not act to get possession of it, one may enjoy just “day dreaming” about it. This is a dangerous process and not many people understand how bad (addictive) that can be.
- In the “upadana paccaya bhava” step, one does not necessarily need to take action to make “bhava” or “kamma beeja”. Conscious thinking (vaci sankhara) is enough, if done long enough.
So, when you say, “If this is the case, controlling sankappa/assada is not a trivial matter. It is the key to gradually start reducing tanha and eventually removing it.”, that is exactly right.
As for #3: The fish seeing the bait and immediately getting attracted to it is tanha. Then actually thinking how nice would it be to taste is upadana.
Of course, a fish does not have much of a neocortex like we do to “think about it”. It just goes with the first impulse; basically tanha is followed automatically by upadana, and then also acting on it.
Of course, even if we all have the neocortex, many of us do not make use it. It needs to be used in order to really become effective. This is why it takes time to cultivate Anapana/Satipatthana. It gets easier with time to “slow down and think about the consequences”, and not to act on impulse.
Yes. It depends on the person. Abhidhamma is not necessary, but if one likes it, then one can see much deeper.
– Abhidhamma is more precise, and in fact when are there unresolved issues with sutta interpretations, one has to fall back on Abhidhamma.“Say one comes across a fruit tree in the woods or finds a valuable object in a public place. In both instances, one is taking, if he does, that which is not given.”
We can clarify these by looking at the “intention” (whether there is greed involved), and also “whether anyone will be harmed by a given action”. That is the bottom line.
In the case of the fruit tree in a forest, it does no harm to anyone to eat a fruit from it. So, that is not theft.
But in the latter, there is someone who lost that item. So, if there a “lost and found” office at the public place, one should return it there.
But if one finds a valuable thing lying on the road, say, then it is fine to take it, unless there is a way to find the owner. If it is really valuable one could give it to charity on behalf of the (unknown) owner.
So, depending on the situation, we can figure out what to do.
“How is it said here that a Sotapanna has the license to be exceedingly heedless? The translation cannot be right, I sense. He is free of only apayagami deeds.”
- Yes. The translation could be better. What is meant is if one attains the Sotapanna stage, then even if one is not diligent (i.e., does not strive hard), one will attain Arahanthood within 7 seven bhava (which could be a long time, by the way; even one existence in the human realm could be many thousands of years; in deva and brahma realms it could be millions or billions of years).
- These are called “dhammata” or “laws of nature”. Buddha did not dictate them, he just discovered them.
“What is the correct translation of the verse : Kiñcāpi te honti bhusaṃ pamattā,”
– It says even if one is “extremely negligible” or “not taking an effort at all”. But that probably meant to indicate one’s behavior in the current life where he just attained the Sotapanna stage.
– Obviously, one will “catch up” in later births or at least later bhava. He still has a long time!““Any evil action he may still do by deed, word or thought, he is incapable of concealing it; since it has been proclaimed that such concealing is impossible for one who has seen the Path (of Nibbana). This precious jewel is the Sangha. By this (asseveration of the) truth may there be happiness.
QUESTION: What is meant here by ‘concealing'(any evil action)?…and ‘such concealing is impossible for one who has seen the Path? Is it because the one on the Path has now become so authentic, so true to himself and to others,so transparent, that he does not even try to conceal it because he has no interest to do so? Is this what is implied here?”
- The verse above this one says there are six kamma that a Sotapanna is incapable of doing: killing mother, father or an Arahant, seek refuge in anything other than Buddha Dhamma, commit niyata micca ditthi, and Sangha bedha. (These are not listed there).
- So, it is POSSIBLE that a Sotapanna could do any bad kamma outside of those, but UNLIKELY. Even if he is forced to do something, he will not do so willingly and will not be able to conceal it, if done. He will show remorse without doubt; he will not be able to conceal it.
– However, he will never be ABLE TO do a kamma that could make him be reborn in the apayas.
1 user thanked author for this post.
That is exactly what I am saying.
It is better to use Pali terms, when it comes to complex key words like these, and understand what is meant by those words.
For example, vinnana is translated as “consciousness”, but it is much more complex: “Viññāna – What It Really Means“.
Same for sanna and many other words: “Saññā – What It Really Means“.
A human gandhabba will be born with a human body many times during that human bhava.
An animal gandhabba will be born with an animal body many times during that animal bhava. For example, a “dog gandhabba” will be born only as a dog, not as any other animal.
The gandhabba state remains that same until that existence (bhava) runs of kammic energy. When that first dog dies, the “dog gandhabba” comes out of that dead body and waits until another suitable “dog womb” becomes available, at which time it goes into that womb and will be born again as a dog. That dog may not look the same as the first one, since the parents are different. But it si the same gandhabba.
Gandhabba is the “mental body”. It cannot change from a human to a dog or dog to a human, until the kammic energy for that bhava runs out.
But if a human dies the last death in that human bhava, he may be born as a dog in the next bhava. OR he can be born as a deva in the next bhava, in which case there is no gandhabba. A deva will be born with a full deva body and live in that way until the kammic energy for the deva bhava runs out.
See, “Bhava and Jati – States of Existence and Births Therein” and “Gandhabba – Only in Human and Animal Realms“.
“still we can come to a kind of experience which is not defiled, right? Then in the seeing there is only the seeing, in the hearing only the hearing etc. There are no likes or dislikes or even a subject/object split..”
When we see an object, whether we generate likes/dislikes depends on the object AND our gati.
One may not generate any like/dislike if the object is of no interest. We see so many things in a given day, but like or dislike only a fraction of them.
However, if we do experience like or a dislike, that happens very fast. It happens with mano sankhara, due to our gati automatically; see, my response to “Difference between Tanha and Upadana“.
It is a good question. When one really understands the difference one can see that eventual result of one getting attached AND committing kamma happens in two steps.
As we discussed many times, we get “attached” to something AUTOMATICALLY based on our gati. These first arise as mano sankhara. This will happen as long as we have tanhā (either via either via kama raga or patigha; avijja is present in both cases). We automatically get attracted; see, “Tanhā – How We Attach Via Greed, Hate, and Ignorance“.
Now, as soon as we becomes aware of this “attachment” to something, we have the ability to be mindful and think about its consequences and move away from it. We can do this at the early vaci sankhara stage; see, “Correct Meaning of Vacī Sankhāra“.
On the other hand, if we just “go with the flow” and go along enjoying this sense attraction, that is what is called “upādāna“. It basically means “pulling it closer” (“upa” + “ādāna”, where “upa” means “close” and “ādāna” means “pull”).
So, basically do not have control over the “tanhā” or “initial attachment” step. It happens with mano sankhara that arise due to our gati.
But if we are mindful, we can immediately become aware of it at the vaci sanhara stage (where we are just thinking to ourselves about this sense input, even before speaking out loud about it), we CAN stop the upādāna step, i.e., we can decide not to “pull it closer”.
For example, if we see an attractive person, we may automatically start looking at him/her. But once we become aware of it, we can look away, and start thinking about something else.
In another extreme example, a person who is trying to control anger, may start talking back to someone who just said something harsh. But as soon as realizing that one is going back to the old habit, one can even stop in the mid-sentence.
When we start controlling the upādāna step, our gati will slowly change. Then, with time, the first step of “tanhā” will reduce, and eventually go away.
That is the basis of Anapana and Satipatthana meditations.
We also remember that in Paticca Samuppada, it is “..vedana paccaya tanha, tanha paccaya upadana..”. So, tanha comes first, and then upadana.
This is a very complex subject.
But I think the key point is that we NEVER experience a single citta.
In a pandvara citta vithi there are 17 citta. Then it is followed immediately by three manodvara citta vithi; see, “Citta Vithi – Processing of Sense Inputs“.Then if the subject is of interest, there will be many many more sequences of the above in rapid succession. Millions of them can occur in a split second.
It takes at least 10 milliseconds (hundredth of a second) for us to register a picture in our mind according to scientists; see #7 of “Citta and Cetasika – How Vinnana (Consciousness) Arises“.
So, what we experience is the cumulative effect of millions of citta vithi.
We NEVER experience the cakkhu vinnana that arises first. By the time we have the experience, they are contaminated due to our gati. What we experience is vinnanakkhandha, not citta or even vinnana.
