Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
C.Saket had asked me this question via email sometime back, and I published a post at that time giving some ideas:”The Infinity Problem in Buddhism“.
But I need to revise that post when I have time.
The key point is that there are many philosophical questions out there. While it OK to contemplate on such things if one has time, one needs to decide whether it is fruitful to spend a lot of time on them.
One example is Zeno’s paradox. People have wasted time debating that. Google “Zeno’s paradox” and read about it if you are not familiar with it. It seems like an impressive mathematical problem, until you realize that it can be solved by experience in a minute. It is said that Socrates, for example, when told about the paradox, just drew line in the sand and walked across it without saying a word.
Another thing to think about is that the Buddha said that a Buddha is there to teach how to get rid of suffering, and to explain things about this world, some of which are not graspable by a normal human mind. He explained this to a bhikkhu names Malunkyaputta who threatened to give up the monastic life if the Buddha did not explain him about the beginning of the world, etc. See;”Cūḷamālukya sutta (MN 63)“. A reasonable translation at”The Shorter Discourse to Mālunkyāputta (MN 63)“.
But discussions like this do have some use, so I will post a revised version of my original post when I get time. If others point out any other relevant issues to address, or other relevant facts, I can incorporate those too.
@Siebe: I am glad to see that you are making progress.
Full understanding of anicca, dukkha, anatta does not come in one shot as a big revelation, even though just getting a glimpse of it makes one’s mind joyful. One can see that there is a Path to happiness (via getting rid of suffering).
It comes is stages. A Sotapanna Anugami gets a glimpse of it, and the basic idea is permanently established at the Sotapanna stage. That is when one can start putting it to practice.
By the time one gets to the Anagami stage, one has seen AND verified the uselessness of seeking sense pleasures.
It is only at the Arahant stage that one has truly verified that it is useless to crave anything at all in this world of 31 realm (even jhanic pleasures, ability to travel through the air, etc). We cannot even begin to imagine that stage. That is where one truly gets rid of the “sense of me”, by realizing via experience that it does not make sense to take any part of pancakkhandha as “mine”.
Theory itself is not enough. That is just the beginning. One meaning of Sotapanna is “starting on the stream or the Path”. Then one starts putting the theory to practice.
Buddha Dhamma is deeper than anyone can possibly imagine.
Vilaskadival said: “In my opinion, all initial sense inputs are neutral..”.
That is true except for the sense inputs coming through the kaya indriya (physical body).
– Vipaka of past bad kamma bring bring bodily pain (headaches, injuries, cancer and other other diseases, etc).
– Vipaka of past good kamma bring bring bodily pleasures (any pleasurable bodily sensation like a good massage, etc).Details at, “Does Bodily Pain Arise Only Due to Kamma Vipāka?“.
@Siebe: Do you mean: Can natural bhavanga be changed?.
No. The natural bhavnga is unchanged for the whole bhava, even for future births within the same bhava.
One cannot really feel one’s bhavanga, just like one cannot see one’s own eye (except in a mirror). But, it is the bhavanga that makes conditions for compatible thought objects to come in (through the mana indriya).
For example, when one is in a “temporary sad bhavanga state” one feels an overall sadness only because more and more sad thoughts come to the mind. One does not directly feel the sadness. When one is in a “temporary angry bhavanga state” one feels an overall state of anger only because more and more angry thoughts come to the mind.
But one CAN overcome that by forcing the mind to focus on something different. Here the best is to start thinking about the drawbacks (adinava) of continuing to be angry.
Therefore, the key point is that when one learns Dhamma, one will not be bound by bhavanga (unless one has an ahetuka birth). One can learn to be mindful and change the initial course of action that is set automatically by the bhavanga, gati, avijja, etc. While one cannot change bhavanga, one can change gati and avijja. That is why Nibbana is possible.
Hello, Rajitha. Welcome to the forum!
Namarupa formation is a deep subject. I recommend reading the subsection: “Nāma & Rūpa to Nāmarūpa“.
Of course namarupa formation is subjective. Basically, one “prepares one’s own future” by the way one cultivates one’s sankhara. “Sankhara paccaya vinnana” leads to the cultivation of different types of vinnana, which in turn give rise to kamma beeja for future births. The Paticca Samuppada cycle leads to bhava and jati, and thus to all future suffering.
This is where one puts together all aspects of one’s understanding of Buddha Dhamma. Vinnana is the the link between between mind and matter, as explained in that subsection.
Siebe said: “Thanks Lal. Unfortunately I do not know that sutta. Do you, or somebody else, have a reference?”
When I come across it, I will post it here. Hoepfully, someone else will post it sooner.
Siebe said: “Do you agree the breaktrough is a life-changing event or is it not that dramatic?”.
Of course, one’s life is drastically changed at the phala moment. But it is not like one feels that like a thunder striking.
One realizes that a drastic change had happened over days, weeks. When one thinks back and compare past events to one’s current state of the mind (cooling down), one can see a drastic change. And over time, based on how one responds to certain situations, one can see that too. How I think about what the Sotapanna stage means, is probably evident from my writings. It cannot be put into a single paragraph. But the main thing was the realization that it is unfruitful to do even the slightest “immoral thing” no matter how much one can get back materially (money, fame, etc) by doing it. Another thing is that even if you do something wrong (or not quite optimally), you have a nagging feeling that you should have responded differently for the rest of the day.
Akavan said: “There is no explanation about a Chetho Vimuttho person”.
The Buddha attained the Buddhahood via akuppa cetovimutti. How he went up the “Ariya jhana ladder” on the night of attaining the Buddhahood is described in detail in the “Tapussa Sutta (AN 9.41)”. The sutta ends with the Buddha declaring:”..Ñāṇañca pana me dassanaṃ udapādi: ‘akuppā me cetovimutti, ayamantimā jāti, natthi dāni punabbhavo’”ti.”
As pointed out in the “Maha Nidana Sutta (Digha Nikāya 15)”, when one attains the akuppa cetovimutti, one automatically becomes an ubhatovimutti.
Furthermore, it appears that a Pannavimutti Arahant could become an Ubhatovimutti by cultivating jhana.
As we have emphasized before, all types of Arahants, and even the Buddha, gets to the same Nibbana. They all attain Parinibbana (full release) upon the death of the physical body.
Siebe said: “It seems like realising Sotapanna stage in the sutta’s is expressed in different ways..”.
Yes. It can be expressed in many different ways.
Not only that, but different people attain the Sotapanna stage by “seeing” it in their own ways.There is a sutta where a bhikkhu was perplexed when hearing different Sotapannas explaining what they understood it to be. The Buddha gave an example of different people describing a certain tree based on what the most significant thing they saw about the tree: how the leaves, fruits, or trunk look like.
Siebe said: “This breaktrough is very difficult to realise. It is compared to splitting a hair in 7 pieces by an arrow (SN56.45)!
Does this still refer to Sotapanna or maybe to arhant stage?”.
That sutta is about the Arahant stage, FULLY comprehending (“yathābhūtaṃ paṭivijjhanti..”) the Four Noble Truths.
Siebe said: “I have understood that bhava can (also) refer to a specific state of mind in this live (point 2 in your post)…It is not really clear to me what is the difference between those two.”
Here is #2 on the post:
“2. Basically, bhava means “the potential for existence” in EITHER one of the 31 realms of possible existence (we can see just the human and animal realms) OR as some specific state of mind within the current life.
– In the first category, there is human bhava, animal bhava, Tusita deva bhava, peta bhava, abhassara brahma bhava, etc.: existence in one of the 31 possible realms. As we will see below, many such “potential bhava” exists for each living being, and at the end of the current bhava, a new one will grasped based on the relative energies for various bhava (kamma beeja) that one has cultivated in one’s past.
– Even during this lifetime, we “live under different existences” based on significant life events. This is the second category. For example, a normally “good person” may become violent for a short time upon seeing his wife in bed with another man, or one will live in a “state of sorrow” for many days upon the death of a loved one.”
In the first category, “the state of the mind” is that state acquired at the moment of grasping the current human bhava, as explained in the post. For example, like remembering previously done good deed.
First kind lasts through the lifetime, and the second kind is temporary, short term, AND changes from event to event. Of course, the second kind overrides the first kind while it is in effect, but the first kind ALWAYS comes back.
Can you state clearly why you don’t see the difference between those two categories?
Johnny_Lim said:”Is the Bhavanga maintained by our kammic energy, specifically by the Jīvitindriya cetasika?”.
That is a good question. I had not thought about it. But here are some initial thoughts.
Bhavanga is a “state of mind”. When fully in bhavanga, there no flowing citta vithi. However, bhavanga citta can fill in parts of a citta vithi. So, all universal cetasika will be in any bhavanga citta. However, I have not seen any information about the involvement of cetasika in a fully bhavanga state. May be someone else has more information on this.
Yes. While depressing and saddening, your Grandma’s experience could be related to what you suggested. I have heard and read similar accounts from many others.
There are several accounts in the Tipitaka too. Cunda Sukara, who killed pigs for living, screamed like a dying pig for several days at the end before dying. The Buddha said that it was because he was seeing images of an apaya where he was going to be born.
Siebe said: “MN44 §7 is about how sakkaya ditthi is establised and §8 how it is not established. Maybe you have translated §8?”
Yes. I had inadvertently looked at the wrong paragraph. So, both Bhikkhu Bodhi’s and Sutta Central translations DO NOT have those inherently incorrect translations.
However, as I pointed out the key point is the translation of “samanupassati”, as just “seeing”.
Siebe said: “So, indeed, i think this sutta’s want to express there is indeed a huge difference between ending sakkaya ditthi and really experience in a detached manner.
This makes sense for me.”
I am glad to hear that. This is a subtle point, yet it makes a huge difference in grasping the difference between the Sotapanna stage (removing Sakkaya Ditthi) and the Arahant stage (removing asmi mana, the “perception of “me”).
I agree with SengKiat‘s comments.
But there is a cetovimutti attained by anariyas like Alara Kalama at the time of the Buddha. That is not Nibbana.
When a Noble Person attains Nibbana via jhanas, he/she attains akuppa cetovimutti (akuppa means “unshakable”); see “Ascendance to Nibbāna via Jhāna (Dhyāna)“.
Either way (pannavimutti or akuppa cetovimutti) the end result is Nibbana.
The verse from the “Culavedalla Sutta (MN 44)“:
“Kathaṃ panāyye, sakkāyadiṭṭhi na hotī”ti?
“Idhāvuso visākha, sutavā ariyasāvako, ariyānaṃ dassāvī ariyadhammassa kovido ariyadhamme suvinīto, sappurisānaṃ dassāvī sap¬purisa¬dhammassa kovido sap¬purisa¬dhamme suvinīto, na rūpaṃ attato samanupassati, na rūpavantaṃ vā attānaṃ, na attani vā rūpaṃ, na rūpasmiṃ vā attānaṃ. Na vedanaṃ … pe … na saññaṃ … na saṅkhāre … pe … na viññāṇaṃ attato samanupassati, na viññāṇavantaṃ vā attānaṃ, na attani vā viññāṇaṃ, na viññāṇasmiṃ vā attānaṃ. Evaṃ kho, āvuso visākha, sakkāyadiṭṭhi na hotī”ti.Bhikkhu Bodhi translation (per Siebe): “Lady, how does personality view come to be?”
“Here, friend Visakha, an untaught ordinary person, who has no regard for noble ones and is unskilled and undisciplined in their Dhamma, who has no regard for true men and is unskilled and undisciplined in their Dhamma, regards material form as
self, or self as possessed of material form, or material form as in
self, or self as in material form. He regards feeling as self, or self
as possessed of feeling, or feeling as in self, or self as in feeling.
He regards perception as self, or self as possessed of perception,
or perception as in self, or self as in perception. He regards formations
as self, or self as possessed of formations, or formations
as in self, or self as in formations. He regards consciousness as
self, or self as possessed of consciousness, or consciousness as in self or self as in consciousness”.Sutta Central translation: “But what, Noble Lady, is embodiment view?”
“Here, friend Visākha, an unlearned worldling, one who doesn’t meet the Noble Ones, who is unskilled in the Noble Dhamma, untrained in the Noble Dhamma, one who doesn’t meet Good People, who is unskilled in the Good People’s Dhamma, untrained in the Good People’s Dhamma, views bodily form as self, or self as endowed with bodily form, or bodily form as in self, or self as in bodily form.”My translation: “Lady, how is Sakkaya ditthi NOT established?”
Here, friend Visaka, a knowledgeable disciple (sutava ariyasavako), who has “seen” Ariya Dhamma and is well-informed in Dhamma and is with good conduct ( ariyānaṃ dassāvī ariyadhammassa kovido ariyadhamme suvinīto), same for moral qualities (sappurisānaṃ dassāvī sap¬purisa¬dhammassa kovido sap¬purisa¬dhamme suvinīto), WILL NOT SEE rupa as mine (na rūpaṃ attato samanupassati), etcI am not sure how both those translations missed the “na” or NOT. The other key word is samanupassati (sees according to), related to passati (sees).
Even more perplexing, how did they translate “sutava ariyasavako” as “unlearned worldling”?? No drastic harm was done since “na” was missed in all the places.
But the point of importance to the current discussion is the difference between “seeing” and “verifying and experiencing”. As I have discussed at length, “seeing” and “verifying it be true by experience” are two different things. Please re-read my post on January 18, 2018 at 7:48 am above: “But “seeing” and actually experiencing that to be true are two different things (which may not be apparent to most people, but it is a critical point in Buddha Dhamma)..”
That is the difference between the Sotapanna stage and the Arahant stage; that is a HUGE difference!
In response to my post on January 18, 2018 at 7:48 am above, you said you agreed. And then you just go back to bringing the same issue again in a different way (by saying anicca is impermanence?)!
I don’t think there is anything else I can do, unless you can point out a specific contradiction in my explanation.
