Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
@Vince: Sorry. I guess I did not catch that it was his father. So, let us look at your specific question:
“I had a specific question about the issue of a dying parent being placed on or removed from life support; Does it count as an anantariya kamma if
1) a person chooses not to place a dying parent on life support or
2) if the person chooses to cease giving life support to a dying parent?”
First of all, in cases like this, children SHOULD NOT get involved in the decision making; it is far too dangerous for them. It is best to leave such decisions to the medical personnel (and maybe to other close relatives, who would not be subjected to anantariya kamma).
With that out of the way, I think either decision above could be counted as anantariya kamma in some cases and possibly not in other cases (as you said, it depends on what types of cetasika arise in the mind of the decision maker).
This is why it is best to leave the decision to others. Even if they make the “wrong decision”, it will not become an anantariya kamma for them. I remember a desana by Waharaka Thero, where he said that usually son-in-law or daughter-in-law could consult with medical personnel to make such decisions. That makes sense to me.
Those two types of micca ditthi are applicable only for the humans.
Even though many animals also have a mother and father, and have those two types of micca ditthi that is irrelevant anyway; they have no sense of other types of micca ditthi either.
The term gandhabba is normally reserved for the “mental body” (kammaja kaya) of a human or an animal. In most other realms, the living being is formed with “a full body” at the cuti-patisandhi moment.
The preta realm belongs to the apayas, i.e., it is one of the lowest four realms. Animal realm also belongs to the apayas.
So, there is a huge difference between a human gandhabba and a preta. There is also a huge difference between a human gandhabba, animal gandhabba. The word preta is not used to refer to a gandhabba.
I think the possible confusion may come from the fact that some pretas have very fine bodies, just like (human or animal) gandhabbas. But brahmas also have such fine bodies, and brahmas are very different from gandhabbas or pretas.
The following post provides some references from the Tipitaka for a human gandhabba:”Gandhabba State – Evidence from Tipiṭaka“.
Without the concept of a gandhabba, it is not possible to have a consistent picture of human and animal realms. For example, the difference between bhava and jati is impossible.
These are discussed in the following sections. You can scan through and read those of interest:
“Mental Body – Gandhabba“.When the gandhabba is not inside a physical body (when it is waiting for a womb), it is in “paralowa“. Not believing in paralowa is one of the 10 types of micca ditthi; see #5 of “Ten Immoral Actions (Dasa Akusala)“.
P.S. Any sutta that discusses the 10 types of micca ditthi will have the reference to “para loka“. Actually, the term “parolowa” is the Sinhala word for the Pali term “para loka“. I need to revise those posts with the word “paralowa” with “para loka“.
- “In the post “The Origin of Matter – Suddhāshtaka” it discusses how kammic energy is cyclical”.
- “Also, where does the “1000 fold” bad or good kammic energy come from upon repayment/kamma vipāka arising? If we only personally put in “x” amount of energy into the akusala/kusala bucket, who’s putting in the other 999%”
- “Another question that pops into mind, if an Arahant isn’t generating any energy to keep the gandhabba in existence, what is?”
-That is not correct. Kammic energy is NOT recycled. That kammic energy can bring vipaka, and based on those vipaka, we do NEW kamma and create NEW kammic energy. So one could accumulate many such kamma beeja during a given life. That is why the rebirth process does not end for a normal human.
– All that is said in that post (or any other post) is that a seemingly “small” kamma actually may have vipaka that SEEMS TO BE disproportionate; but actually it is not disproportionate.
– For example, we may think that killing a human by shooting once with a gun, could not bring vipaka where one will be subjected to suffering in the apayas for millions of years. But that is how kamma/kamma vipaka work. The javana power that arise in a mind is responsible for that. In order to kill a human, a lot of hate must arise in a mind. This is why kamma is a subject that is acinteyya (not fully understandable) by a human other than a Buddha.– The physical body of the Arahant (and the gandhabba within that body) arose due to a past kamma (i.e., a kamma beeja that was created in the past). The physical body and the gandhabba will be kept alive by that previous kammic energy.
– For a normal human, another existing kamma beeja will initiate a new bhava (and new jati), when the kammic energy for the current human bhava runs out. Then that energy will support potentially many births during that bhava, until that energy runs out, and so on. It is never ending process until Parinibbana.Any physical action takes effort, so it is dukkha. Therefore, dukkha was experienced by both the Buddha and Ven. Ananda. However, Buddha’s actions did not involve abhisankhara (sankhara with kammic consequences), whereas Ven. Ananda (who was not an Arahant at that time) did.
Many of these questions can be answered by understanding what is meant by sankhara and abhisankhara. See, “Sankhāra – What It Really Means” and posts therein.
- “..I think it was mentioned that an Arahant would eventually have to let go of even the Buddha’s Teachings”
- “In this case, are the Buddha’s teachings themselves anicca?… Buddha’s teachings can get distorted and parts of it can fail to get passed down…” and “If the Buddha’s teachings become distorted or incomplete, might that cause dukkha? “
- “Finally to Arahants, are the Buddha’s Teachings anatta? Is it the case that after having grasped their essence, they become devoid of worth and substance, and have to be let go of? To further cling to The Buddha’s Teachings would only serve to impede their progress?”
- “I think that an asankata such as nama gotte is anatta in nature, but does not have anicca or dukkha. Thus the three characteristics do not have to occur together in the case of nama gotte, an asankata.”
– It is not that an Arahant HAS TO let go of Buddha’s teachings. Buddha Dhamma is needed to attain Nibbana. Once attained there is NO NEED for it.
– Distorted Dhamma is NOT Buddha dhamma.
– Buddha Dhamma is NOT of anicca nature.– Sabbe sankhara anicca, sabee sankhara dukkha, and sabbe DHAMMA anatta.
– Sabbe dhamma includes all. So, yes in the end (once Arahanthood is attained) that is also of no use.
– We need to remember that somethings in this world NEED to be used to attain Nibbana, even if they have anicca, dukkha, anatta nature.
For example, doing punna kamma is an abhisankhara (it is a punnabhisankhara). So, it is of anicca nature. But we MUST do punna kamma to prepare the background to attain Nibbana.
– In the step-by-step process, one stops doing papa kamma (apunnabhisankhara) first. Then as one gets closer to Arahanthood, any punnabhisankhara and anenjabhi sankhara (cultivating arupavacara jhana) will also be stopped. – – At Arahanthood, there is no more abhisankhara to be done, and no more Dhamma to be followed.– Anything is this world is of anatta nature, including nama gotta and even Buddha Dhamma. But one NEEDS Buddha Dhamma to attain Nibbana. Once Nibbana is attained, there is no need for Buddha Dhamma FOR THAT Arahant.
@Vince and @firewrns:
This issue has been discussed under several topics, and a couple of links are given below.Three main things to remember are:
- There are five anantariya kamma: killing mother, killing father, killing an Arahant, injuring a Buddha (a Buddha cannot killed), Sangha bheda (which is interpreted as schism among Sangha, but also includes misinterpretation of Dhamma).
–No other kamma will be an anantariya kamma.
2.In many instances, an action may involve both kusala/punna kamma and akusala/papa kamma. Sorting out some complex situations is almost impossible.
– As one progresses on the Path, one will automatically make right decisions.- Regarding #2 above, “cetana” in an action is determined by the what types of cetasika arise AUTOMATICALLY in one’s mind. That is based on one’s understanding of Dhamma.
These are discussed in:
“Clarification of definition – ” anantariya“”“What is Intention in Kamma?“.
“Kanha (Dark) and Sukka (Bright) Kamma and Kammakkhaya”
Kamma is a complex subject. The third post above should be read at the end. It discusses “effective removal of kamma“.
The key point is that these complex issues will be resolved in stages as one progresses on the path. But it is OK to think about them. When reading the above discussions and posts, hopefully things will become more clear.
The need to learn about the 31 realms is somewhat similar to the need to learn Abhidhamma. They are both not necessary, but could provide additional information to build faith in Buddha Dhamma. However, for those who are not that familiar with these, it could raise questions like the ones Aniduan has raised.
Since Buddha Dhamma describes a much wider world (with 31 realms) than just the 2 realms (human and animal) that we are aware of, it initially takes some effort to start understanding this “big picture”. Even though 31 realms makes the picture more complex, it is necessary in order to have a self-consistent picture of the world.
For example, it is not possible to explain laws of kamma and paticca samuppada without the 31 realms. Let me just take a simple example to make this point.
Births in various realms are according to one gati.
One’s gati are cultivated via “what kind of things one enjoys or likes”: “pati icca leading sama uppada” or paticca samuppada; see, “Paticca Samuppāda – “Pati+ichcha”+”Sama+uppāda“.Those with vicious hateful gati are likely to be born in the niraya (hell). Those with excess greed are likely to be born in the preta realms. Those with “lazy gati” are likely to be born in the asura realm. Those with “animal gati” in animal realms, those with “good moral gati” in human and deva realms. On the other hand, there are some who cultivate jhana and value jhanic pleasures much more than sense pleasures in human and deva realms. They are born in the brahma realms.
Since there are very few with abhinna powers these days, it may be a bit difficult to “believe in the existence of those realms”. On the other hand, for those who have studied Dhamma in detail, it is easy to see the need for all those realms.
So, it depends on the person. This is why each person should follow what makes sense and other things may become clear with time. It is not possible for each and every person to have the same understanding, which evolves with time too.
For a deeper analysis, see: “Buddha Dhamma: Non-Perceivability and Self-Consistency“.
y not said: “As far as I can see, all that one can do is to constantly re-enforce one’s good gathi (by staying away from akusala, observing the precepts,mindfulness, doing Metta Bhavana, Pattidana, and dana of any type), thus re-enforcing those kamma with good vipaka.”
Yes. Only thing we can do is to stay on the Noble Path. The Buddha said that the only thing a farmer can do is to take care of the field by providing water, nutrients, etc. A good harvest will result. No point is worrying about whether one will have a good harvest.
Good question.
There is at least one sutta defining panca bala the other way: “Punakūṭa Sutta (AN 5.16)“:
“Pañcimāni, bhikkhave, balāni. Katamāni pañca? Saddhābalaṃ, vīriyabalaṃ, satibalaṃ, samādhibalaṃ, paññābalaṃ—imāni kho, bhikkhave, pañca balāni. Imesaṃ kho, bhikkhave, pañcannaṃ balānaṃ etaṃ aggaṃ etaṃ saṅgāhikaṃ etaṃ saṅghātaniyaṃ, yadidaṃ paññābalaṃ. Seyyathāpi, bhikkhave, kūṭāgārassa etaṃ aggaṃ etaṃ saṅgāhikaṃ etaṃ saṅghātaniyaṃ, yadidaṃ kūṭaṃ. Evamevaṃ kho, bhikkhave, imesaṃ pañcannaṃ balānaṃ etaṃ aggaṃ etaṃ saṅgāhikaṃ etaṃ saṅghātaniyaṃ, yadidaṃ paññābalan”ti.”
On the other hand, the sutta Tobias quoted is about Sekha bala.
I am not sure what the difference is. But a Sekha means “one in training”, basically anyone below the Arahant stage.
This is a complex issue. As we know analysis of kamma is one of the “unthinkables” (acinteyya). What that means is a human (other than a Buddha) will never be able to COMPLETELY sort out what happens in a given situation. But we can understand general trends.
Only clear-cut is an anantariya kamma vipaka. That will bring vipaka before any other pending vipaka.
Other than those, there could be many factors coming into play at the cuti-patisandhi moment. But if one of the strong vipaka is clearly stronger, it will come to the front. But if there are several vipaka of about the same “magnitude”, that is when the state of the mind could play a role.
The other KEY POINT to remember is that grasping a new bhava is NOT done CONSCIOUSLY. It is automatic, based on those and possibly other factors. It happens naturally, just like many things in the nature just happen according to nature’s laws.
For example, when a reservoir starts overflowing, the water will go over the lowest point of the wall holding the water, if the height of the wall is not the same. Or, in a hurricane, while those trees with weak roots could be uprooted, one’s with strong roots will survive. It just happens, based on many factors at play (strength of the winds, weakness of roots, whether a tree a shielded by other trees, etc).
Yes. it is a rare event. The probability is very low, but it is possible. The Buddha clearly said that coming out of the apayas is a rare event, but it does happen.
As we have discussed before, at the cuti-patisandhi moment, many strong kamma vipaka from the past come to the mind, and one is selected based on the state of the mind at that moment. It is possible that an animal may have had a strong good kamma vipaka from the past.
– There is a sutta about a frog who was listening to a desana by the Buddha. The frog was crushed unknowingly by a person’s walking stick, and it was born instantaneously in a deva realm. This deva, called Manduka deva, then realized how he was born in the deva world, and came back to listen to the same desana which was still in progress. The frog of course could not understand the desana, but his state of the mind (due the soothing voice of the Buddha) enabled him to grasp a deva bhava, based on a strong past good kamma.Another possibility in this particular case is that it is only mentioned about a monkey bhava from the past. It does not need to be the bhava just before the human bhava when the Arahanthood was attained. It is possible, for example, that there was a dvihetuka human bhava in between the monkey bhava and the last human bhava where the Arahanthood was realized.
” That means if an ahetuka or dvihetuka patisandhi took place while grasping the human bhava, it is not possible to reach magga phala within that whole bhava.”
That is correct.
I think the confusion is with ahetuka birth and ahetuka cuti-patisandhi.
Monkey bhava was an ahetuka birth DUE TO an ahetuka cuti-patisandhi from a PREVIOUS bhava.
Then a tihetuka cuti-patisandhi occurred when the kammic energy for the monkey bhava was exhausted, and then a tihetuka birth in the human realm took place.
I also revised my previous reply.
@Tobias: Cuti-patisandhi means the kammic energy for the previous bhava had been exhausted (cuti) and grasping (or attaching to) a new bhava.
So, that Arahant WAS in an animal bhava (monkey bhava), and was born a monkey many times and exhausted that kammic energy. Then at the cuti-patisandhi moment, human bhava was grasped. So, he attained Arahanthood after being born a human.
The sequence is: Monkey bhava (where he was born a monkey many times). When the kammic energy for the monkey bhava expired, human bhava grasped at the cuti-patisandhi MOMENT. Then he was born a human within that human bhava. Then he attained the Arahanthood.
