Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
Gad wrote: “Venerable Arahant Sariputta became sotāpanna by listening to a single verse. It took him a few weeks to become an arahant. He dodged the other two stages of the magga phala. “
- If you meant Ven. Sariputta skipped the stages of Sakadagami and Anagami to get to the Arahant stage, that is incorrect.
- One ALWAYS goes through the four stages sequentially. He must have attained Sakadagami and Anagami stages before getting to the Arahant stage.
Excellent.
- This is precisely how one should do vipassana, not specifically to do what Dosakkhayo did above, but to contemplate critical concepts in many different ways.
- One should always try to apply new concepts to areas of interest, personal experiences, etc. That helps solidify the concepts in the mind.
- The more one becomes convinced of the truth of Buddha’s teachings, the easier it will be to progress in losing cravings for worldly pleasures.
- Even though an average human (puthujjana) cannot even think of a life without “sensory pleasures,” once one truly comprehends the concept of “distorted saññā” one starts to understand why the Buddha said being exposed to sensual pleasures is like being thrown into a fire pit: “Dukkhadhamma Sutta (SN 35.244).”
4 users thanked author for this post.
“Āyatana” can mean different things depending on the context.
- The six “indriya” (cakkhu, sota, ghana, jivha, kaya, mano) become “āyatana” in a defiled mind. That is one context.
- But “āyatana” could be used in the context of “a place” too. That is the context in the verse you quoted.
I discussed that in the post “Nibbāna “Exists”, but Not in This World.” The following is from that post:
The “Paṭhama Nibbāna Paṭisaṃyutta Sutta (Ud 8.1)“. It says, “Atthi, bhikkhave, tadāyatanaṃ, yattha neva pathavī, na āpo, na tejo, na vāyo, na ākāsānañcāyatanaṃ, na viññāṇañcāyatanaṃ, na ākiñcaññāyatanaṃ, na nevasaññānāsaññāyatanaṃ, nāyaṃ loko, na paraloko, na ubho candimasūriyā. Tatrāpāhaṃ, bhikkhave, neva āgatiṃ vadāmi, na gatiṃ, na ṭhitiṃ, na cutiṃ, na upapattiṃ; appatiṭṭhaṃ, appavattaṃ, anārammaṇamevetaṃ. Esevanto dukkhassā”ti.”.
- The first part is “atthi, bhikkhave, tadāyatanaṃ.” Here “atthi” means “exists,” and “tadāyatana” is another word for Nibbāna. tadāyatana comes from “tath” + “āyatana,” where “tath” (pronounced “thath”) means “perfect.” Since Nibbāna is something that we cannot define in terms of words, the closest English word for “āyatana” is something like “dimension” or “sphere.” This “āyatana” is not to be confused with the six āyatana referring to the six sensory faculties in “Nāmarūpa Paccayā Salāyatana.”
2 users thanked author for this post.
Excellent. Thank you.
- Yes. We have happily engaged in the “rat race” for an unfathomable time.
- Only when a Buddha discovers the “illusion” (māyā) can we figure out the illusion and become free of the suffering-filled “rat race.”
- Note that to “meditate” (bhāvanā) primarily means “to understand the process of creation of this illusion.” Our own minds create the illusion!
- Once the mind is convinced that it is indeed an illusion, it voluntarily gives up craving for sensory pleasures. It helped me immensely to give up much of my cravings. No “pleasure/happiness” is intrinsic to anything in this world. The “deliciousness of a meal” is NOT in a meal; our bodies are designed (by kammic energy) to provide the “perception of taste.”
- Even an Arahant gets that perception of a “delicious meal” because they still have the physical body they were born with. But their minds have fully comprehended the illusion and have lost any interest in it. A little child builds a sandcastle because they appear mind-pleasing. Yet, they see the futility of engaging in that activity when they grow up and voluntarily give it up.
3 users thanked author for this post.
Yes. I did understand your intention, Saket. Thank you for pointing out the movie.
- I just wanted to make some relevant Dhamma points.
1. If I remember correctly, the movie describes a world where humans live in a “virtual reality” created by AI (Artificial Intelligence.)
- There is also a philosophical hypothesis that humans live in a “simulation.” Many people, including Elon Musk and Scott Adams, believe that we live in a simulation. See, for example, “Confirmed! We Live in a Simulation.”
- Then, the question comes up: “Who created that simulation?” If it is a computer-generated simulation,” someone must have written the program!
2. The correct explanation is that we live in a “world” created by our minds. It is not a simulation. That is how the world works, and that is how it has been from an “untraceable beginning.” There cannot be a “beginning” to a process based on the principle of causality.
- However, there can be an end to that process (not for the whole world, but for each person). When the root causes are eliminated, the existence (and perpetual suffering) ends.
- When the Buddha talked about “ending the world,” he meant the ending of the existence of a given person in this world. Why would one want to “end the existence in the world”? Because in the long run, there is MUCH more suffering than short bouts of “happiness” or “pleasure.”
3. It is true that the Buddha called vinnana a “magician” and sanna a “mirage” in the sutta that Sacket referenced (and I have discussed: “Sotapanna Stage and Distorted/Defiled Saññā.”).
- However, no one created that scheme. That is how the world has operated from a time going back to infinity.
- We create the illusion in our minds. We cultivate specific “gati” with our actions rooted in rage, dosa, moha. Then Paticca Samuppada (Principle of Causality) guarantees that we will born into a world matching those gati, and corresponding illusions about reality.
- Once one understands the complete picture, there will be no doubts. Reality is not created by anyone (a Creator), nor is it a “simulation.” Both those hypotheses are incompatible with the Principle of Causality. Modern science is based on the Principle of Causality, but it cannot find the complete solution until mental phenomena are taken into account. Scientists are only focused on material phenomena, a byproduct of mental phenomena!
2 users thanked author for this post.
I believe you mean “dhammā” here.
- Dhammās are “kammic energies” created by our minds. They arise in a special type of citta: javana citta.
- There must be a living being with a mind to generate any type of citta, especially javana citta.
- Therefore, a living being must have arisen via jāti to generate dhammā.
Dhammās or “kammic energies” are created at the “upādāna paccayā bhava” step in Paticca Samuppāda.
- They can lead to new “jāti” via the uppatti Paticca Samuppāda.
- That is how the rebirth process (samsāra) continues.
1 user thanked author for this post.
Gad asked: “Can the absence of sexuality really be a sign of the anagami stage?”
- No. There are people born asexual, and some even without sexual organs. However, they are DEFINITELY not Anagamis because Anagamis cannot be reborn in the human realm. They are born that way due to kamma vipaka. For example, those who commit sex crimes (e.g., rape) and those who mutilate the sexual organs of others are likely to be reborn that way.
- Those people, when the kammic energy is “exhausted,” will be reborn with normal sexual functions. They have kama raga anusaya/samyojana intact all that time.
- On the other hand, an Anagami has removed kama raga anusaya/samyojana from the mind. They have “seen” (with wisdom or panna) the drawbacks and dangers of kama raga and have cultivated Satipatthana to remove it.
Yash wrote: “Wanting (stress)—leads to Seeking (stress)—–and after Acquiring ——Pleasure (relief from vexation/stress)—-which again leads to——Wanting ( Stress).”
- That is quite true. That is a unique feature of any “sensual pleasure,” not only sex but the craving for food, music, etc.
- The desire is temporarily satisfied when engaging in sex, eating, etc., but the urge ALWAYS comes back and will “keep bothering” until one again engages in whatever that activity was.
- All of us have been doing that in this beginningless rebirth process: Chasing a “mirage.”
2 users thanked author for this post.
Yes. Confirming the Sakadagami stage is tricky.
- In the suttas, the Buddha only says, kama raga is attenuated; there is no “measure.”
- The following can be used as guidance. A Sakadagami will not be reborn in the human realm; they are reborn in a Deva realm. Therefore, a Sakadagami would have “Deva gati” and not “manussa gati.” It has not been clarified in the suttas, but we can probably deduce that Devas do not engage in sexual activities like humans: they don’t give birth to children (their births are opapatika.) But they have male and female Devas. May be they get enough “mental pleasure” by associating with the opposite sex.
- However, the Anagami stage is much more clear-cut. One will not have any desire for sex. An Anagami will be reborn only in Brahma realms, where two sexes do not exist.
The best way to get to either stage is to cultivate “asubha sanna.” Our craving for sensual pleasures is based on the “distorted sanna” that we have. In brief, “subha sanna,” or the idea that external objects/people have mind-pleasing properties, is false. But it may take time to grasp those concepts fully.
- Cultivating “asubha sanna” means contemplating the material discussed in the recent posts on “distorted sanna” and fully understanding those concepts. That is part of the actual “vipassana mediation” (or Satipatthana.): “Sotapanna Stage via Understanding Perception (Saññā).”
- Of course, those concepts also help with getting to the Sotapanna stage.
2 users thanked author for this post.
Yes. The critical point is that how one responds to a particular sensory input depends on (i) the types of samyojana/anusaya rooted in the mind and (ii) the conditions prevailing at that moment.
- Now, for an Arahant, the second part does not matter since all samyojana/anusaya have been removed (and, thus, the mind cannot get defiled with raga, dosa, moha, i.e., it is a pabhassara mind). Regardless of the situation, an Arahant will NEVER respond unwisely and move away from the pabhassara mind. If all the root causes have been removed, the Paticca Samuppada cycle cannot even start.
- At the other extreme of a puthujjana (with all samyojana/anusaya intact,) the conditions present at a particular moment play a huge role. If the sensory input is strong (and tempting), one can “get attached” to it; depending on the conditions present, one can respond in many possible ways.
In the case of a puthujjana, there is “an attachment,” at least at a very subtle level for ANY sensory input.
- That is because a puthujjana‘s mind always starts with a “distorted sanna” as we have discussed in recent posts: “Sotapanna Stage via Understanding Perception (Saññā).”
- But, in most cases, even a puthujjana would not take CONSCIOUS actions if the “attachment to that sensory input (arammana)” is not strong enough. Javana cittas generating strong kammic energy (especially for rebirths) are associated only with conscious actions. Still, the mind of a puthujjana is contaminated from the beginning.
1 user thanked author for this post.
I am glad you figured it out, Gad.
- Just because a gandhabba has an invisible subtle body does not mean it is a “spirit” or a “ghost.”
- In rebirth accounts, there is always several months to many years gap between those two successive lives. That human lives in the gandhabba state in between the two lives with dense physical bodies. You and I were in that state before being born with this physical body.
For those who may not be familiar with this discussion, the following is a list of posts on gandhabba:
“Search Results for: gandhabba“
1 user thanked author for this post.
Let me ask you a couple of questions:
1. When a human with a physical body (like one of us) dies, and more kammic energy remains in the human bhava, what is it called?
2. Does a hungry ghost (peta) belong to the human bhava?
Yes. “Paccaya” is a bit hard to put into words. I hope the following comments can help.
1. Dosakkhayo’s statement, ” For example, avijja paccaya sankhara does not mean one always acts foolishly, but when in a certain condition(like seeing a wallet on the street) he/she does some immoral things with avijja” conveys the right idea.
- Let me give another example. Suppose a weak person (X) is being harrassed/hit by a strong person (Y.) X could be thinking, “If I had a gun, I would shoot him right now.” But since X did not have a gun, he could not kill Y. The “avijja” mindset was there, but he did not have the necessary condition (a gun) to carry out what he wanted to do.
- Of course, X would accumulate kammic energy via “vaci kamma” (vitakka/vicara or “defiled thoughts with the intention to kill” running through his mind.) But that is not as strong as a “kaya kamma” (shooting and killing Y.)
2. Now, let us look at the second part:
“But I still have a second problem: I can not see the paccaya of ‘phassa paccaya vedana.’
Let me explain this problem a little bit more.
In the ‘sankhara paccaya vinnana’ step, the paccaya is the situation where abhisankhara seems to have solved the problem. In that situation, stealing and eating bread (abhisankhara) can lead to the expectation (kamma vinnana) that ‘stealing bread solves hunger’ or ‘It is okay to think that stealing bread is a good solution’.
Such situations include that he was putting his hunger first before anything else, that he was praised by others for stealing bread, or that he decided to think it was okay for himself so as not to feel guilty. So the paccaya in the ‘phassa paccaya vedana’ step is also a situation.
But if samphassa ja vedana has no choice but to come right after samphassa in the citta vithi, why does vedana need extra paccaya?
Or doesn’t ‘A paccaya B’ mean that ‘B needs an additional paccaya besides A to happen’?
- There are two types of “vedanā” involved. He felt huger, and that is one vedanā. That vedanā arose first with the sensation of hunger where only the “phassa” cetasika was involved.
- When the idea of “stealing bread” is established in the mind, that is a “samphassa” (contact with “san“) and NOT “phassa.” With “samphassa” a second type of vedanā arises: “samphassa-jā-vedanā.”
- Note that in Paticca Samuppada, “phassa paccayā vēdanā” ALWAYS means “samphassa paccayā samphassa-jā-vedanā.”
- I have made a few revisions to the post “What Does “Paccayā” Mean in Paṭicca Samuppada?“
That phrase is in the “Pathama Niraya Sagga Sutta (AN 10.211)“: “Natthi dinnaṃ, natthi yiṭṭhaṃ, natthi hutaṃ, natthi sukatadukkaṭānaṃ kammānaṃ phalaṃ vipāko, natthi ayaṃ loko, natthi parō lōkō, natthi mātā, natthi pitā, natthi sattā opapātikā, natthi loke samaṇabrāhmaṇā sammaggatā sammāpaṭipannā ye imañca lōkaṃ parañca lōkaṃ sayaṃ abhiññā sacchikatvā pavedentī’ti.”
- The three phrases I bolded provide somewhat similar meanings. All involve giving. The first (Natthi dinnaṃ) is about generic “giving” (dāna); the subsequent two have increasingly higher impact.
- The following translation in the first two links Dosakkhayo referred to is better: “(i) giving (dana) has no merits, (ii) being grateful and responding in kind (for what others have done for oneself) has no merits, (iii) respecting and making offerings to those with higher virtues has no merits.
- I have revised the third post to have the exact translation as above.
1 user thanked author for this post.
The sutta that Gad’s post refers to is: “Jāṇussoṇi Sutta (AN 10.177).”
- The English translation in the above link is a little better, but it will be helpful first to sort out some main features.
1. When someone in the family dies, it is customary in many Buddhist countries to “make an offering to bhikkhus” and “give merits” to the one who died (as well as those in the family who had died previously).
2. Janussoni asks the Buddha (@ marker 2.4): “Can they actually partake in such merits offered?” OR “Can they actually benefit from it?”
- The Buddha says, “Ṭhāne kho, brāhmaṇa, upakappati, no aṭṭhāne”ti.” OR “They can benefit if they are born in places where such merits can be received.” (“Ṭhāne” means “place.”)
3. @ 3.2 to @3.5, the Buddha first explains why some are born in the niraya (hell); then he says those born there CAN NOT benefit from such merits given.
- Similarly, @4.1 – @6.4: The Buddha says those reborn as animals, humans, and Devas also CAN NOT receive such merits.
- But @ 7.1 – @7.4: Those who are now in the hungry ghost (peta or pettivisayaṁ) CAN receive and benefit from such merits.
I think that may help in understanding the rest of the sutta in both translations.
- If anything else is not clear, please ask. Refer to the markers in the above link.
1 user thanked author for this post.
