Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
One observation: 99% of Dhamma material out there consider nibbana to be anatta, since they take anatta to be “no self”.
Hi all, I was just looking for a thread in the anicca, dukkha, anatta forum to write something, based on a recent discussion with someone, and I’ll just right it here, and hopefully some things will be relevant to the discussion at hands. It has to do with an analogy I came up with about the difference between ditthi and saññā conerning anicca, and I wish to get input about the analogy.
But first, a couple of things in response to upekkha100:
You said you have read every post on anicca, dukkha, anatta. In fact, I came upon this website many years ago precisely because of these topics.
I assume some of the posts you read are in this section:
Anicca, Dukkha, Anatta
I do come here from time to time to review. As you see, anicca is discussed under 4 angles/perspectives:Anicca – Inability to Keep What We Like
Anicca – Repeated Arising/Destruction
Anicca – Worthlessness of Worldly Things
Anicca – The Incessant Distress (“Pīḷana”)Lately, the perspective about “Worthlessness of Worldly Things” resonates with me a lot.
Anicca – Worthlessness of Worldly Things
Also, years ago we were discussing a desana from Waharaka Thero, and Lal kindly translated it. The theme of the talk was also related to anicca from the point of view of how we put high value on things that are worthless. See if this way of looking at anicca clicks with you. Best of luck!
=====
Now, to the main reason I wanted to write; it also has to do with anicca. We learned that:(1) Having samma ditthi about anicca regarding kāma to a certain extent can get one to the sotapanna stage; let’s call it “anicca ditthi” if we can create a new phrase.
(2) A sotapanna still enjoys kāma until he/she develops “anicca saññā” to overcome that. And a few posts in the above-mentioned section is about developing annica saññā.Recently I was sharing this with someone and was asked: “What is the difference between “anicca ditthi” and “anicca saññā“? At that time I was able to only say that saññā is deeper understanding, that ditthi was “vision” whereas saññā was “perception”.
Later, I came up with the following analogy since I enjoy watching magic shows.
Let’s say two adults and a child are watching a magic show in which a magician produces a bird from a supposedly empty hat and then vanishes it.
The child truly believes that the magician has the magic power to conjure the bird from thin air and then vanish it into thin air. The child is engrossed in the act.
Adult A KNOWS that the magician uses a trick, that it’s not possible to create a bird and then make it disappear, but he has no idea how the magician does it; and he also enjoys the show.
Adult B can see through the trick — for example when the magician distracts (misdirects) the audience to slip the bird into the hat, when he pulled the bird out, when he misdirects the audience again and slips the bird into his coat, etc. Adult B may just watch the show knowingly without being attached to it.
I liken the child to someone with no “anicca ditthi,” Adult A has “anicca ditthi” but not “anicca saññā,” and Adult B has “anicca saññā.”
Does that make sense?
Thank you,
Lang1 user thanked author for this post.
@pathfinder
You referred to the English transcript by Janith Boniface Fernando. Do you know that there is a transcript prepared by Lal himself:
https://puredhamma.net/wp-content/uploads/Waharaka-Thero-Discourse-The-Way-to-Nibbana.pdf
As you said, this desana is in simple language, yet I find it a tremendous resource, and review it very often. Hope everyone finds great benefits from it.
Best,
Lang“Not knowing that the initial attachment doesn’t need a doer …”
The ignorance here is likely not about a “doer”, or whether a “doer” is or is not needed, but it is ignorance about anicca, dukkha, anatta.
In your example, looks like you were describing the following steps in paticca samuppada (in nidessa version):
samphassa paccayā samphassa-jā-vedanā
samphassa-jā-vedanā paccayā taṇhā
taṇhā paccayā upādānaYou may be interested in the following post:
Taṇhā Paccayā Upādāna – Critical Step in Paṭicca Samuppāda
Best,
Lang1 user thanked author for this post.
@pathfinder
“Also, I haven’t been able to find ‘anatta’ (without long ā) as a standalone word in any sutta, so I don’t think that word exists, …”This may have to do with Pali grammar, where “anatta” changes form depending on the words that appear with it, such as the case or number of the noun it goes with. For example, “Sabbe dhammā (plural) anattā“. This general rule applies to other words like anicca and dukkha as well, as in:
“Sabbe saṅkhārā aniccā” ti, yadā paññāya passati; Atha nibbindati dukkhe, esa maggo visuddhiyā.”
“Sabbe saṅkhārā dukkhā” ti, yadā paññāya passati; Atha nibbindati dukkhe, esa maggo visuddhiyā.”
“Sabbe dhammā anattā” ti, yadā paññāya passati; Atha nibbindati dukkhe, esa maggo visuddhiyā.”
In general, I notice that the “-a” words rarely appear in their original form; it must be a very rarely-used case. Take “dhamma” for example; a Pali textbook describes “dhamma” as the vocative case. Other cases, such as accusative or locative, must be more common, thus we see more of: dhammam, dhammo, dhammesu, etc.
1 user thanked author for this post.
Here’s a very short one, but I think it captures the essence of the Bhante’s teaching.
In the “6R” method the Bhante taught he often emphasized the “Relax” step. In the video he talked about the “tightening” of the mind at the “craving” step, so relaxing is relaxing of that “tightening”.
Dependent Origination Explained – A Key Buddhist Teaching
If you do a search on Youtube there should be much longer videos of the Bhante about paticca samuppada.
1 user thanked author for this post.
After Relax, it is “Re-smile” — intentionally putting on a smile before returning to the object of meditation (metta) after a distraction. The Bhante did say that he put the smiling step in there himself since he found it helpful.
A very popular talk from the Bhante is this one:
What is a Jhana? Commentaries vs Suttas – Meaning?
At around 27:35, he said how easy it was to get to the 1st jhana.
At around 22:00 he talked about smiling.
From about 1:00, he talked about how one moves from jhana to jhana and then to nibbana (by seeing “dependent origination”).
Personally, at one point I listened to Bhante a lot although I did not practice this, at least not as the main practice. I must say it did bring a sense of calm fairly quickly, but then I directed that calm mind to contemplating anicca, dukkha, anatta, although near the end of the talk the Bhante said that one cannot see nibbana via seeing anicca, dukkha, anatta.
I have not watched the video posted on this thread, but I happen to know of this method or technique (if we can call it that) of the 6Rs. It is also called TWIM (Tranquil Wisdom Insight Meditation).
It was the teaching from the late bhikkhu Bhante Vimalaramsi at Dhamma Sukha Meditation Center:
https://www.dhammasukha.org/the-6rs
In this link there is a video instructions of the meditation:
Instructions for Metta or Lovingkindness Meditation and the 6Rs by Bhante Vimalaramsi
There are many talks by Bhante Vimalaramsi on Youtube about metta bhavana that leads to jhana.
My guess is that Delson Armstrong is now the principal teacher at Dhamma Sukha.
Best,
LangIt’s great to hear of personal experiences of others. A couple of questions:
— (1) —
@Christian
“…real jhana shakes up the whole worldview especially materialistic.”Is the “shaking up” due to the fact that one has entered another loka, i.e. the rupavacara brahma loka? So that now one sees first hand that other lokā other than the kama loka exist?
— (2) —
@Lal
P.S. Also, to reach magga phala, two more stages of Anuloma (A) and Gotrabu (G) must be accessed. For example, a Sotapanna Anugami may reach the upacāra samadhi and not go through the other two stages for a while (could be months or years) until attaining the Sotapanna phala.… but in the post
Citta Vīthi – Processing of Sense Inputs
… the last sentence sounds like the sotapanna anugami stage happens at the Gotrabu moment:
“The change to an Ariya happens even before the Sōtapanna phala moment, at the Gotrabu (G) moment. Gotra means “lineage,” and Gotrabu is the change of lineage. Thus, one would become a Sōtapanna Anugāmi with the Gotrabu citta.”
Best,
Lang1 user thanked author for this post.
First, let’s reiterate something obvious that everyone already knows: When one makes an effort in understanding and living Buddha Dhamma one will get many “Aha!” moments, which lead to real, unshakable saddhā.
pathfinder brought up how historical evidence can also help build faith (saddhā), and there is no question that they do — up to a point. However, they can potentially lead to more time wasting as dosakkhayo pointed out concerning the nature of evidence.
Let’s use as example the first Buddhist Council from pathfinder, and let’s suppose that an Ashoka pillar has just been discovered with some inscription that suggests that there was some kind of a gathering at the location mentioned in the tipitaka. Will that settle it? Not necessarily, as the pillar may spawn more interpretation — just like dosakkhayo pointed out — such as:
The inscription is vague
It may be about a gathering of some other sects
Disagreements among scholars as to the meaning of parts of the inscription
ad infinitumSo, do we then spend more time, potential endlessly, discussing the evidence?
I brought up Ashoka pillars because I personally find them convincing, and that may be the only kind of “evidence” available to us in modern times, along with stupas.
I remember reading about the Ashoka pillar at Lumbini, with the inscription that King Ashoka visited the site to honor the birthplace of the Buddha. And then many, many years back I saw the news about an ancient Buddhist shrine discovered there. With that, I was convinced that the Buddha was born in the area of Lumbini, like the tipitaka said.
Are all of my Buddhist friends convinced of the birthplace of the Buddha as I am? No. Some say that what I call “evidence” is still inconclusive; do I then spend more time to debate with them that it is conclusive, or do I just spend that time studying Dhamma? We all know what the right answer is.
Best,
Lang2 users thanked author for this post.
Hi,
I’d like to ask a different line of question about jhana samapatti if I may.
Let’s say that a person is in an anariya jhana samapatti, which means that during that time he is in a temporary rupavacara bhava.
Is the upadana paccaya bhava step still operating in this case? And if so is jhana the object of upadana?
Thank you,
Lang1 user thanked author for this post.
In psychology, there is something called the confirmation bias: people’s tendency to process information in a way that is consistent with their existing beliefs. It is one of many cognitive biases, but it is the central one.
What makes this so hard to correct is because we don’t even know that it is going on, because of another bias: the blind spot bias, ie we cannot see our own biases.
Furthermore, even when we can see things logically, another layer of ego protection comes in: we can’t be wrong. Accepting new view points mean that we were wrong before, and if we have been wrong for decades then the stakes are too high.
To be a bit facetious, those old enough to know the sitcom “Happy Days” may remember the Fonzi character, who cannot get the word “wrong” out of his throat.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CvdY3HfepOo
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qPMIdIGj8v0
The confirmation bias, plus a bit of “Fonzi” in us, may prevent people from accepting Dhamma concepts if they conflict with their existing understanding.
AI is free from these emotional conflicts.
That’s my 2 cents.
Best,
LangMany of the points here are also in the following post:
A Google search showed the Pali name Siddhatta Gotama for the Sanskrit Siddhartha Gautama.
I’d like to share an experience from a long time ago that I found interesting, although it is an “off Dhamma topic”.
More than 10 years ago I met someone from Nepal with the last name Shakya. He knew that I was Buddhist, so he shared with me that his parents and grandparents told him that his family descended from the Shakya clan of the Buddha himself (he also quipped that there wasn’t a bone of enlightenment in him).
I was curious to do a search and found this article from way back:
The Shakya Clan in India: A Rediscovered Heritage
I know that in our PD community we have different views about where the Buddha actually lived. I personally believe that the Buddha lived in India — was born in Lumbini, attained buddhahood at Bodh Gaya, turned the wheel of Dhamma at Sarnath, parinibba at Kusinārā — so the geography in the article made sense to me; but that’s a side note. Regardless, it was nice to to read about a group of people rediscovering their heritage and turning to Buddha Dhamma, whether or not they are truly the Shakya people of the Buddha’s clan.
Best,
Lang1 user thanked author for this post.
nibbana is the object of a pabhassara citta, see below (at the end of the post).
Nirōdha Samāpatti, Phala Samāpatti, Jhāna, and Jhāna Samāpatti
At first, I thought that the pabhassara citta is supramundane (lokuttara), so I took it to mean that it was not quite a manōdvāra citta; I thought a manōdvāra citta took only a dhammmā from this world.
Searching around, I saw that it took nibbana as the object. I guess this is where the two spheres, lokiya and lokuttara, “touch”.
Furthermore, see this thread, where Lal stated that “the “pabhassara citta” does not fall into any of the three “dhatu” or “loka.”
https://puredhamma.net/forums/topic/compilation-of-my-thought/#post-50814
