Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
I am in no position to comment on this text; that’s above my pay grade. However, the notion that one has to fully experience kammic consequences before making an end of suffering has to be false.
If that were the case, Angulimāla would never have attained arahanthood in his life. One of the themes at puredhamma.net here is that not everything is determined by kamma, and that by removing avijjā and taṇhā, one can bypass future kamma vipāka.
Best,
LangFor numbers 7 and 8 regarding Mother and Father, would it be correct to expand them to include nurturers? There are cases when Mother and Father are not around, and a baby is raised and nurtured by other people.
A typical example is adoption at birth. Let’s say that Joe Average was adopted at birth, and he later cannot locate his biological parents (they could have remained anonnymous, moved away, or even died, etc). For Joe, “Mother” and “Father” are really his adoptive parents, correct?
Thank you,
LangReading this makes me smile since I remember reading this section a while back. I remember well the strong impression I got in learning that rupakkhandha was mental. That was the first such interpretation of rupakkhandha I came across.
This reminds me of another instance when I read for the first time a new (to me) interpretation of something I thought I was already familiar with. It was also related to the subject at hand.
I’ll have to look up the Pali verse, but I remember Lal’s explanation (I’ll look up the post too) as follows: Seeing is just a trace of seeing, hearing is just a trace of hearing, etc.
Those who have gone to vipassana retreats elsewhere may remember this verse well, where it was translated something like this: in seeing there is only seeing, in hearing there is only hearing, etc. It was then further explained in terms of “no self”, such as: seeing is only seeing, there is no “I” behind it who “sees”, etc., and realizing this means realizing “anatta”.
I carried these notions with me for a LONG time until coming to puredhamma.net.
Best,
My understanding is also that insight into Dhamma is gradual; at least, that’s how I think it works at the Sotapanna stage. Sotapanna magga phala happens in a thought moment (within a citta vithi), but that moment is not noticeable. Months (or perhaps years) later, a person then realizes his life has really changed, that he is no longer capable of doing any acts that may bring rebirths in the apayā.
I used to know someone striving to quit smoking, and there maybe an analogy here. He followed a regimen such as substituting smoking with running, contemplating the bad consequences of smoking, etc. Then one day he realized that he had not smoked a cigarette for months, and he felt just fine. He couldn’t pinpoint a moment when the “giving up” of cigarettes happened.
Purifying our minds probably works the same way; it involves removing defilements (which are kind of like addictions). Over time, we may notice that certain defilements are no more, but we cannot pinpoint the magga phala thought moment that eradicates those defilements.
Interestingly, I’ve come to notice that many breath meditation practitioners (anapana to them) believe in such a “eureka” moment. They hold that when the mind becomes totally present (via the breath) then the “light bulb goes off”, bringing a flash of insight, and that’s how magga phala happens. Here, we have learned over and over that breath meditation is NOT anapana.
Good one. I did not intend any pun, but I liked your take on it!
Indeed, the search has ended, and it was a long one — almost 30 years. Like you said, it is now about walking ON the path; the search for the path is over, and for that I am eternally grateful.
I remember reading from “What The Buddha Taught” (Walpola Rahula) where the Buddha told Ananda that he did not have public teachings on the one hand and secret teachings on the other; that there is nothing witheld in “the closed fist of the teacher”.
For a number of years in the past, I’ve had my share of exposure to the “faster way to salvation” (mostly Mahāyāna), and sudden enlightenment (mostly Zen). More esoteric schools then evolved from Mahayaha, where there are public and private teachings (Tantra, Vajrayana, etc.). They are very alluring to certain types of people; and summbodhi’s analogy to MLM, although crude, is apt here.
Anyhow, we are very lucky to have ended up here instead.
Got it. Thank you!
I was trying to ask (in an unclear way) whether or not we can be conscious of mano sankhara (as in whether or not mano sankhara is noticeable), and it looks like they are, although they are automatic due to gati. Take the example of seeing an object and the initial liking of it; although that liking is automatic, it is noticeable and observable.
This is good news, right? since if we can notice gati, then we can work to reduce bad ones and cultivate good ones. Elsewhere in other forums, I shared that I am now mainly working on removing miccha ditthi to get to the sotapanna stage. Nowadays, quite often I can “catch” miccha ditthi, which is a mano sankhara, when it happens, and then counter it.
Best.
So, we can never “see” mano sankhara, but we can see the effect of it.
Let’s say that an unwholesome conscious thought is present, such as a thought of violence toward someone; then we know that there is unwholesome mano sankhara behind it.
On the other hand, if we observe a wholesome thought in ourselves, such as a thought of generosity, then we know that wholesome mano sankhara is happening.
Lal said: “When we speak, in addition to the sound coming out, our thoughts “emit” the idea to the external world too.”
Is it correct to say that the sounds coming out is vaci sankhara, and the ideas emitted from the thoughts mano sankhara?
Thank you
Thank you, Lal.
As we spend more and more time on puredhamma.net, we are more drawn to Pali, so knowing a bit more about the language like this is exciting.
On an unrelated matter, I wrote these responses in Internet Explorer. Lal mentioned a bug in the system, and often posts did not get published. I experienced that several times, and Lal helped me post. I was using either Chrome or Firefox then, and this time, I used IE, and it went through! You may want to give it a try.
I think I see the difference: there is an extra mark at the end to indicate plurality, the mark that looks like the letter “C” reversed; and written in English, I believe this is represented as the dash above the letter a: ā.
If this is the case, then does it apply to nouns ending in vowels other than a, such as:
1 bikkhu –> many bhikkhū
1 bikkhuni –> many bhikkhunīBack to the word “dhamma”. Is it true to say that:
“dhamma” as in what one bears is always plural: dhammā
“dhamma” as in buddha dhamma is singular: dhammaThank you
LangLal said: “In other words, in “saññā nirodha” thoughts arise without much of past memories….”
Is this similar to Alzheimer’s / dementia?
I’m in a position to be in contact with elderly people with this condition. They exhibit: (1) almost no short term memory, (2) not able to keep track of date/time, and (3) thoughts that arise seem disjointed from one another.
This seems uncannily similar to saññā nirodha. If anyone has insights into communicating with those with Alzheimer’s / dementia, please share.
Metta
It is indeed HARD to just ignore feelings, even in a retreat, at least for me. There is a long discussion about Goenka’s technique in the meditation forum, and this is exactly what they do there: scanning the body from head to toes, observing the sukha and dukha vedana (kayika vedana), and maintaining a neutral mindset about them — no craving for sukha vedana and no aversion for dukha vedana, because all vedana come and go (or arise and pass away). Seeing this coming and going (or arising and passing) of vedana means beginning to see anicca.
Lal said: “The key is to truly understand that there is no “experiencer.” That will really help to suppress the “mind-made” vedana or samphassa-jā-vēdanā.”
Using this approach, if we feel a vedana (say a pain in the knee), instead of watching the “impermanent” nature of the pain, we can contemplate that there is no “feeler” behind that pain, right? That the pain is just kamma vipaka?
If that’s the case, I suppose we can extend that to the other senses? Take hearing as an example. Sometimes, I am bothered by surrounding noises while sitting. Will it be helpful to contemplate that there is no “hearer” involved.
To take this even further, I wonder if we can apply this to breathing. I still have a habit of doing breath meditation, although I’m learning to wean from it after reading the Meditation section. But, using this context, instead of doing breath meditation as a samatha method, is it ok to do it to contemplate that there is no “breather” behind the breathing?
Thank you all,
Lang
