Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
1. Many people are not aware of these subtle issues. Don’t worry, Gad.
- Unless explained by a Buddha or a true disciple of the Buddha, no human can figure those by themselves, no matter how intelligent one is.
- I was lucky to find the correct explanations from a Noble Person.
2. It is always a good idea to keep in mind that the Buddha mostly talked about the mind, not the structure of the physical world.
- All the terms in the Paticca Samuppada are mind phenomena, even though they may relate to external things.
- That is why āhāra do not refer to physical food but “food for the mind” (not in a good sense, but to extend the suffering.)
1 user thanked author for this post.
The first two meanings:
1)Physical food (kabalinkāhāra)
2)Contact (phassāhāra)
Those are not correct.
1. All four types of “food” (āhāra) are “food for the mind to be engaged in the rebirth process. An Arahant does not take in any of the four types. An Anagami does not “consume kabalinkā āhāra” even though they (and Arahants) eat food.
2. Kabalinkāhāra (kabalinkā āhāra) is not physical food. It is the CRAVING for tastes, smells, and body touches in general. As we know, those three senses are available only in kama loka (the lower 11 realms, including the human realm and six Deva realms.)
- When craving for the three types of “close contact sensual pleasures” is stopped, kabalinkā āhāra ceases (nirodha).
- At that point, one is freed of rebirths in kama loka (the lower 11 realms, including the human realm and six Deva realms.)
- The other three types of “āhāra intake” by the mind stop at the Arahant stage.
3. “Phassa” in “phassa āhāra” refers to “samphassa.” That is not merely contact but “contact with san” or “san phassa,” which rhymes with “samphassa.”
4. See “Āhāra (Food) in Udayavaya Ñāna” This is an old post and may need to be revised. I see that I have mainly discussed kabalinkā āhāra.
1 user thanked author for this post.
Thanks, y not.
Here is the link to the other thread (where the same verse was discussed again) referred to by y not:
“Paṭhamasañcetanika Sutta (AN 10.217)“
I have not read this thread yet. If there are questions on any of the above threads, feel free to ask questions or comment.
1 user thanked author for this post.
Thank you, y not.
- Yes. The thread is “AN 10.219 Karayakayasutta (The Body born o f Deeds).”
- The first verse (which is the critical one) appears in three consecutive suttas, AN 10.217 through AN 10.219.
In the link above, I translated ““Nāhaṃ, bhikkhave, sañcetanikānaṃ kammānaṃ katānaṃ upacitānaṃ appaṭisaṃveditvā byantībhāvaṃ vadāmi, tañca kho diṭṭheva dhamme upapajje vā apare vā pariyāye. Na tvevāhaṃ, bhikkhave, sañcetanikānaṃ kammānaṃ katānaṃ upacitānaṃ appaṭisaṃveditvā dukkhassantakiriyaṃ vadāmi.” as:
“Bhikkhus, as long as one does kamma without understanding “san” (how defilements are associated with their certain actions or “appaṭisaṃveditvā”), they will never be able to bring existence to an end (byantibhavama), either in this life, the next life or in any future life. Therefore, they will not be able to bring suffering to an end (dukkhassantakiriyaṃ).”
- Note that there is no mention of “vipāka” in that verse.
Please see the above link for details.
1 user thanked author for this post.
I found a sutta that expresses what I tried to explain in #1 of my above comment. The basic idea is that a puthujjana believes that ultimate happiness is in external “things” like houses, cars, etc.
But a Noble Person (Ariya) sees it precisely the opposite way. Attachment to such worldly things is the cause of future suffering.
I found a sutta that expresses it well: “Paṭhamarūpārāma Sutta (SN 35.136).”
The English translation there is good enough except for the following verse to make it more clear:
@ 4.2: “sakkāyassa nirodhanaṁ” means “stopping the sakkāya (pancupadanakkhandha.) The first step in doing that is to remove sakkāya ditthi (the wrong view that pancupadanakkhandha is beneficial; one tries to acquire luxury houses, fancy cars, etc, on that wrong view).
The following is a critical verse (and the translation is good) @ marker 5.1:
“Yaṁ pare sukhato āhu, tadariyā āhu dukkhato“
Translated: “What others say is happiness, the noble ones say is suffering.” (Here, tadariyā is “tad” (that) + “Ariya” leading to “that one conventionally accepted as “happiness” an Ariya sees as suffering.”) Also, “pare” means “others” or “non-Ariyas” or puthujjana.
In the above example of acquiring luxury items (fancy houses, cars, and things that exceed one’s basic needs), one goes through much effort (sankhara dukkha) to acquire those. But at death, there is nothing to show for it. Because of any immoral deeds done in that process, one may even get a bad rebirth (leading to more dukkha dukkha.) A subtle aspect there is the embedded “viparinama dukkha” because just the process of cultivating such sankhara takes one away from the “pure mind” (pabhassara citta), i.e., in the wrong direction of “viparinama” (read my explanation of parinama/viparinama in the above comment).
2 users thanked author for this post.
1. Tobi wrote: “Anyone who tries to know the Absolute Truth with his six senses will fail miserably and continue to suffer in infinite samsara. “
That is exactly right. There is a deep point here. Normally, an average human (puthujjana) thinks that “pleasures” (assada) are in external objects perceived with five physical senses. Then they use the sixth sense (mind/mano) to come up with ways of acquiring more “things in the external world” in the hope of enjoying more assada. For example, one makes money to buy better houses, cars, cell phones, and watch movies, listen to music, eat delicious foods, try to marry a beautiful partner, etc.
- Even though it seems first that those efforts bear fruit, in the long run, none of those efforts lead to a “permanent satisfaction.”
- It is not easy to understand that any sukha experienced has a “hidden dukkha” embedded. This world can be thought of as a coin with sukha on one face and dukkha on the other. If one likes to get rid of even a trace of suffering, one should not be “attached to” (or have tanha) those external things. Dukkha cannot be eliminated without giving up “worldly pleasures.” In return, one will get a “permanent sukha” that is not a “vedana” since it cannot be expressed in terms of this world. It is the ‘absence of even a trace of suffering,” and it can be experienced in this life! That experience comes in stages where one can experience the loss of “dukha vedana,” mostly the “mind-made dukha vedana” (one obvious aspect of this is depression, which is of common occurrence these days despite the availability of so many ways of experiencing sensual pleasures.
2. Under the “First Noble Truth,” Tobi wrote: “3. Vipariṇāmadukkhatā “dukkha mano” is related to mental suffering and pīḷana, i.e., attachment to what one has or craving for what one desires.”
That is correct. But there is another way to look at it, which I have tried to emphasize recently.
- Vipariṇāma is the opposite of pariṇāma. Let us understand the meanings of those two words. In English, evolution (pariṇāma) means the time progression of something where it gets better with time. For example, Darwin’s “theory of evolution” (“pariṇāma vāda” in Pāli/Sinhala) says monkeys progressed with time to become humans. Vipariṇāma is the opposite of evolution (devolution), where things move in the wrong/opposite direction with time. When one uses the eyes to enjoy sensory pleasures, one moves away from Nibbāna.
- Every time we engage in an action seeking sensory pleasure, we move away from the “hidden pure mind” or the pabhassara citta; that means we move away from Nibbana.
- I tried to explain that in “Aniccaṁ Vipariṇāmi Aññathābhāvi – A Critical Verse.”
- It requires learning about the “pure mind” in a “pabhassara citta.” One needs to spend some time on the series “Does “Anatta” Refer to a “Self”?” including the section referred there on the pabhassara citta: “Recovering the Suffering-Free Pure Mind.”
3. You wrote toward the end: “I have two guesses as to what this statement of the Buddha means; “has never been heard in this world.”
- The simplest explanation is the following: When encountering an “unpleasurable situation/sensory input,” an average human (puthujjana) knows only two responses: (i) to try to avoid it or (ii) to compensate for it by seeking a “pleasurable sensory input.”
- However, that approach only takes one away from the “suffering-free pure mind,” as explained in #2 above. I explained this in the post “Anicca Nature- Chasing Worldly Pleasures Is Pointless.”
- However, no one knows about this “suffering-free pure mind” (pabhassara citta) unless explained by a Buddha!
4. Regarding Tobi’s question on the double meaning of Pali words, that issue is there with any language.
- I tried to explain that in many posts; see the recent post, “Etaṁ Mama, Esohamasmi, Eso Me Attā’ti – What Does It Mean?“
5. At the very end of Tobi’s post: “These concepts did not even exist in the deva realms. As we know, Abhidhamma was first delivered in a Deva realm.”
- The Buddha delivered discourses in ways compatible with the listener. Devas probably have their own “language” or way of communicating. They likely do not understand Pali.
- On each day of delivery in the Deva realm, the Buddha came to the Earth and met with Ven. Sariputta and summarized that day’s concepts to him (in probably Magadhi, the language spoken at that time by most). This is explained in “Abhidhamma – Introduction.” See #7 there.
- The concepts are the same regardless of the language used. Each language has its own issues. This is a serious issue in translations since a translator needs to be versatile in both languages to do a decent job. Of course, one must also understand the concepts; that is the first requirement.
6. Overall, I am quite impressed by your progress, Tobi. May the Blessings of the Triple Gem be with you in your efforts!
2 users thanked author for this post.
Nicely done, Tobi! Thank you for sharing it with us.
I can make a few comments, but I need to read it carefully first.
Thank you, Gad!
1. In your first post, you wrote:
“..One of these people was lusting after someone’s wife. Realizing that he was generating unhealthy thoughts, he practiced anapanasati (the real, not the mundane) unconsciously. This person saw his householder attributes disappear and became a paccekabuddha.
I will try to find this sutta!”
- Yes. I like to read that sutta if you find it. It is not possible for someone to become a Buddha without comprehending Paticca Samuppada on their own. That cannot be done unconsciously. It needs a lot of contemplation.
- Therefore, practicing the correct version (not the mundane) of Anapanasati cannot be done unconsciously. That involves comprehending Paticca Samuppada first.
2. Regarding your second post:
- Yes. What you wrote about Paccekabuddhas is correct.
- They can teach a few, just like an Arahant can.
- But only a Sammasambuddha (like Buddha Gotama) has the ability to teach the masses and initiate a Buddha Sasana that can last a long time.
1 user thanked author for this post.
“A completely ordinary person can become a paccekabuddha.”
- The wording of that statement may give a wrong impression.
- No one can attain any magga phala, let alone Paccekabuddha status, without cultivating the path in previous lives. That is what is meant by “paramita.”
- Of course, all humans appear to be ordinary people. But each of us has cultivated “paramita” at various levels in our past lives.
- For example, Bahiya Daruchiriya, who attained Arahantship upon listening to a single verse by the Buddha is a good example; see, “Bahiya Sutta (Udana 1.10)“. He was an “ordinary person” too.
- The point is, among us there can be those who are fulfilling “paramita” at various levels, including to become “Sammasambuddha” (like Buddha Gotama) or Paccekabuddha. We cannot determine who is at what stage. Of couse, most are destined to be reborn in apayas.
1 user thanked author for this post.
Bhava refers to different existences in the world.
- The word Buddha comes from “bhava” + “uddha“; here, “bhava” means “existence (in the 31 realms),” and “uddha” means “removal.” Therefore, Buddha figured out how to stop the rebirth process and thus end future suffering. Every birth ends in old age and death; there are no exceptions.
- We can also see that “Buddha Dhamma” means “teachings that explain how to stop “bhava” from arising,” i.e., it is “bhava uddha Dhamma.” Here, “Dhamma” means “teaching.” Note that “dhammā” (with lowercase “d” and a long “a”) “to bear things in this world.”
- Therefore, the words Sotapanna or Anagami cannot be used to describe various existences (bhava) in this world. Instead, they denote the stopping of various bhava: A Sotapanna has stopped rebirths in the apayas, and an Anagami any rebirths in kama loka. An Arahant has stopped the arising of any bhava.
See “A Buddhist or a Bhouddhaya?”
1 user thanked author for this post.
No. Those are different bhava for an Anagami.
- For example, a Sotapanna can be reborn as a human or a Deva. Humans and Devas are in different bhava.
- Bhava refers to different existences in the world.
“What about the uddhamsota-akanittha-gami ? This type of anagami reborn in all the pure abode, until the last one. In akanittha (the highest pure abode), they becomes arahant. Can we say that they have several Jati in the same Bhava?”
Can you point out the different jati within one bhava?
Yes. That is correct.
- Of course, even puthujjanas (ordinary people) can do the mundane version: Being mindful, staying out of immoral deeds/thoughts, and engaging in moral deeds/thoughts.
- The only difference is that a Sotapanna understands the anicca, dukkha, and anatta nature to some extent. As you stated, having lokuttara Samma Sati.
Yes. The usage of “riya” in Ariya is explained the same way in #13 of “Nibbāna – Is it Difficult to Understand?“
The word “bhikkhu” comes from “bhava” + “khaya.” It could also be explained as “bhaya” + “khaya.”
- “Bhaya” means “danger” or “afraid”. “Khaya” is to remove.
- Thus, a bhikkhu striving to remove “bhava” (that gives rise to jati) is striving to attain Nibbana (end the rebirth process filled with suffering).
- In the same way, one who is working to remove the sansaric bhaya or the danger associated with the rebirth process can be called a “bhikkhu.”
- As we have seen, many Pali words (anicca, anatta, etc.) have many different but related meanings.
Also, see “Bhikkhu Sutta (AN 7.85),” which explains a bhikkhu somewhat differently but with a similar meaning.
- It makes no sense to translate bhikkhu as a “mendicant,” meaning a “beggar,” as in the English translation in the above link.
- That is disrespectful!
It is best not to try to translate words like bhikkhu, anicca, and anatta to English, but to use the Pali words and understand the meanings.
4 users thanked author for this post.
