Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
Oops, sorry, I must have given Lal the wrong URL:
නිවන් දකින හරිමග කුමක්ද ? | With English Subtitles
Here’s my 2-cent on this, which is based just on personal encounters with several people in my life.
— Mahi wrote:
“Yet I am not unhappy unless ofcourse strong mental or physical vedanta arise.”I assume you meant “vedana”, and they WILL arise.
I have met several people who took on a gung-ho attitude toward life, asserting: “I can take on the ups and downs of life.” The problem was that they made this statement when they were young and things were going “their way”. This attitude goes away when they are faced with strong mental or physical afflictions; in some cases, they come suddenly (viparinama), in others, they come due to aging and declining.
What we’ve learned in Buddha Dhamma is that this can be stopped from FUTURE arising, and that is real happiness, which is not as illusory as you think if you have experienced some niramisa sukha. There are several posts on niramisa sukha here.
Best,
LangI recall this from the Vakkali Sutta, where the Buddha said:
“One who sees the Dhamma sees me; one who sees me sees the Dhamma. For in seeing the Dhamma, Vakkali, one sees me; and in seeing me, one sees the Dhamma.”
This is definitely beautiful and profound, but applies more to the mindsets of ariyā, in my opinion. The ordinary person does have more need for “rituals” and “background” to build saddhā to continue learning Dhamma.
The above verse also brings to mind this:
“One who sees Paṭiccasamuppāda sees the Dhamma.
One who sees the Dhamma sees Paṭiccasamuppāda.”There’s a whole section on Paṭiccasamuppāda here on puredhamma for anyone who is ready.
Best,
LangLal said:
“– But since it does not get to the “hadayaṃ” stage, the Arahant would have no special attention for mother or ANY attraction to a beautiful woman versus an ugly woman.”It sounds like the arahant has gone beyond attachment to mother (and I suppose father too), and that micca ditthi #7,8 of the ten types of micca ditthi no longer “apply” to an arahant.
I once heard a desana from a thero about going beyond attachment to parents and children. To paraphrase: “In samsara we have had countless parents, and have been parents to countless children, so why are the current pair of parents and the current children more special.”
I’m wonderding now if the thero was speaking from the vantage point of an arahant, that an arahant looks at all beings as their parents and children at some point.
Lal said:
“– Therefore, it is critical to see the difference between “seeing the true nature” and actually abandoning the fruitless process of “pursuing sensual pleasures.”In my own bhavana, I am beginning to turn more attention to kama raga (the not immoral but more intense ones), since I feel I have been making steady progress on micca ditthi. In fact, removing micca ditthi does curb kama raga to some extent.
In that effort, I started listening to the Dharmayai Obai sermons in addition to learning Dhamma here, and there was one that compared sensual pleasure to a mirage. If you search for “Pleasure Mirage dharmayai obai” on Youtube you will find it.
The mirage analogy is quite apt, since the vision of water is real (there is light hitting the eyes and there is a real vision”). Likewise, sensual pleasure appears real and substantial, so keeping the mirage analogy in mind helps somewhat.
Lal said:
“It is in the asankata dhatu (full Nibbaba) AFTER the death of the physical body.”So another way we can say anything about Nibbana is asankata dhatu. Short of parinibbana, is this what is “experienced” by someone in Nirodha samapatti?
And this asankata dhatu must be “one of a kind”. All other dhatu, the kind made out of the maha bhuta, are “sankata”, correct?
Best,
LangHi,
I am curious about one of the Acinteyyā, the one about jhana.
First off, I assume this admonition applies to anariya jhana; if so, does it mean either one of these two, or both, or something else:
(1) Not to speculate what is is like to be in a jhana
(2) Not to cultivate one (e.g. via breath or kasina meditation)Best,
LangLal wrote:
A saṃvaṭṭa kappa (in saṃvaṭṭakappe) is the time taken to re-form the Earth. That means to re-form the whole 10,000 world systems.
– “Samvatta” (“san” + “vatta”) indicates the formation. As we know the word “san” means “adding up” or “aggregation.”A vivaṭṭa kappa (in vivaṭṭakappe) is the time taken to re-form the Earth. That means to re-form the whole 10,000 world systems.
– “Vivatta” (“vi” + “vatta”) indicates “breaking up.”In the second paragraph, don’t you mean: “A vivaṭṭa kappa (in vivaṭṭakappe) is the time taken to break up the earth?
Hello lodonyo,
I understand how you feel (I think) to some extent, since there were (and are) things I wish I’m doing less of. Below is my personal endeavour in working through them; I hope some of them resonate with you.
First, I concur with you that this site is a treasure; coming to it, reading it, and reflecting on it, changed my mind significantly (I hope). I believe Lal created this site to provide resources for us to reach at least the sotapanna stage, so that was one of the first things I studied.
To reach the sotapanna stage, the only defilement to be removed is wrong view (micca ditthi), starting with the 10 types of micca ditthi. So, that’s what I did, i.e. studying and reflecting on the 10 types of micca ditthi.
A little digression here: I can’t tell you how eye-opening just this bit of information was. I used to be told what it took to be a sotapanna, such as: your concentration must be so good that when you sit in meditation, if someone puts your favorite dish to your nose, you won’t smell it; only that kind of concentration can lead to insight. I couldn’t tell you how discouraging that was, since I knew my concentration!
You asked about the most useful practice to do should you end up a miser. I would start with meditating on the 10 types of micca ditthi to get started on the mundane path, contemplating on why having them lead to serious consequences.
Specifically, wrong view #4 about kamma / kamma vipaka on covers a number of other ones. I can honestly say that I am fully convinced of this point now, and it makes the mind feel so much lighter. If things do not happen randomly, that they have causes, then there is always hope. You are also making this point of kamma in your post, so you’ve got a good start.
#6 on the list about para loka and the world of the gandhabba also brought joy to the heart. This was new to me (and I had been studying Buddhism for 30 years prior!). Studying it, seeing how it explains rebirth, was again eye-opening and absolutely convincing, and there was no longer doubt about rebirth, which was another milestone for me.
I did some deep diving on this point about the nature of the gandhabba (or manomaya kaya) with the hadaya vatthu and pasada rupā and so on. Learning the details of the mind again brings lightness to me.
As I began to see incremental BENEFITS (however little), I felt motivated to keep going (and doing better with the 5 precepts in the meantime). Now, the benefits of learning dhamma outweighs those of some forms of sensual pleasures for me — the kinds of pleasures I once held dear; and I gained confidence that the others will fade with time.
That was how my personal journey started with puredhamma.net. Here’s wishing you will be less burdened.
Thank you,
So for an average being, pañcupādānakkhandhā is “huge” (and so is pañcakkhandhā), and dukkhā is enormous.
For an arahant, pañcupādānakkhandhā is no more, and any dukkhā is residual kamma vipaka until parinibbana, and then at parinibbana, pañcakkhandhā collapse, never to rise again.
Is this correct?
Isn’t pañcakkhandhā just another way of saying “this world of 31 realms” and is therefore anicca, dukkha, anatta?
In the Dhammacakkappavattana Sutta, we read: “pañcupādānakkhandhā dukkhā”
If the statement had been just “pañcakkhandhā dukkhā”, it would still have been correct, right? It may even be more comprehensive.
Thank you.
Hi,
I often see a non-committal attitude toward gandhabbas among Buddhists who do believe in rebirth. It goes something like this: “I believe in kamma and rebirth, and to me it doesn’t matter how it happens — with or without gandhabbas”. And such a person most often takes no further interest in the subject of gandhabbas.
Is this attitude also miccha ditthi #6 among the 10 types of miccha ditthi?
Thank you,
LangThis kind of discussion is common among mahayanists (more often from the East from what I see) who delight in using clever words to create an impression of “profundity”. There is no end to how clever they can get with words.
In my native country, Mahāyāna is dominant, and I see this kind of dicussion more often than not. Not only that, a topic like “emptiness”, along with others from Zen and Taoism, make it to popular classic novels. Readers then spend endless time discussing the “philosophy” of these novels, how “deep” they are, and how the author really “got Buddhism and Taoism”.
Also, I suspect that at the core of these discussions is the implication that this is superior to Theravada teaching, that Theravada is just the foundation, where one sees a distinction between nibbana and samsara. At a “higher level”, one sees no distinction between nibbana and samsara (this is especially popular in Zen).
That’s my two cents. Also, this kind of discussion is quite addicting if one is not careful. It’s a form of samphappalāpā.
I must admit I like the “old etymology” better — one of “discarding what is bad”; and it is more closely related to anapana.
So, “passa” here is not the same “passa” in “assa / passa”?
And “vi” means different things in different places too, I suppose? In vicikiccā, you explained “vi” as “twisted”.
“vi” (twisted) + passa (assa/passa) would actually make a good combination: discarding what is twisted. It brings the point home better than “special seeing”.
Anyhow, just some musing; a word is what it is despite my liking.
Best,
Lang
