[cubibobi]

Hi all,

I certainly do not know which sources are correct concerning which hindrances are removed at which stage of magga phala.

I do have a question on vicikiccā since I’m working toward the sotapanna stage. Almost everywhere (including the link from C. Saket) explains vicikiccā as “sceptical doubt”, i.e. doubt about the the Buddha, the Dhamma, the Sangha, the training, etc.

Over the weekend, I listened to a desana from a well-known bhante about the hindrances, and again vicikiccā was explained as “doubt”.

In many posts, including The key to calming the Mind – the five hindrances mentioned above by C. Saket, Lal has explained vicikiccā clearly (with the Pali breakdown), and I don’t see the meaning of “doubt” in it. I wonder where it came from; the Vishudimagga?

Best,
Lang

[cubibobi]

Just one quick follow-up on this, and it has to do with dreams (the bold texts are mine), since this is something I experience a lot.

@Lal
“Fear is two kinds:
1. Fear of losing things in this life, fear of getting sick, losing loved ones, of ghosts, of bad dreams, etc etc. What we can call “mundane fears”.

…
“A good indication is when one does not see terrible dreams anymore, for example, and have a general sense of calmness.”

Are dreams mano viññāna?

We’ve been having good discussion on viññāna in relation to the current “origin of life” series, and I’m wondering if dreams are considered viññāna.

Thank you,
Lang

[cubibobi]

Thank you, Lal, for the explanation. So kammic energy is related to viññāna, and you also had many wonderful posts for us about different types of viññāna.

Here, this viññāna is kamma viññāna, and also viññāna as in “viññāna paccayā nāmarūpa”, correct?

Thanks,
Lang

[cubibobi]

E = mc^2

Just to match these concepts to Pali terms, is it correct to say that, for a gandhabba, the “mass” part is the pasada rupa and hadaya vathu; and the “energy” part the flow of citta vithis?

Thank you for a fascinating series of posts!
Lang

[cubibobi]

“Fear, confidence, sadness, elation are all associated with the “mindset” at the given moment….”

Here, is “mindset” viññāna?

[cubibobi]

Hi all,

A couple of points in this discussion resonate with me due to some recent experiences and discussions I had with some people around me. I’d like to share them, and have question at the end.

@Lal
“Fear is two kinds:
1. Fear of losing things in this life, fear of getting sick, losing loved ones, of ghosts, of bad dreams, etc etc. What we can call “mundane fears”.
2. But one should fear most is the possible birth in the apayas. Such a suffering will not be limited to a mere 100 years.”

I do have my share of “mundane fears” and phobias, and they are limiting and debilitating when they get out of hand.

More recently, the fear of birth in the apayas is taking over more, and interestingly, it’s not debilitating at all. On the contrary, it serves to motivate to work for the sotapanna stage.

My fear of rebirth in the apayas is getting stronger because I am more and more convinced of rebirth, due mainly to two reasons:

1) I spent more time reading reincarnation (a more commonly used term) accounts — writing by Brian Weiss, Carol Bowman, Walter Semkiw, Edgar Cayce, etc.
2) I realized that alternative views of rebirth — an eternal state somewhere, or nothingness — are ridiculous since they are contrary to the law of kamma.

At the same time, I came across another view by some buddhists: there’s no need to consider the afterlife; what’s important is the “here and now”. You take care of the “here and now”, and you don’t waste energy worrying about the afterlife. Elsewhere I’ve seen the term “secular buddhism”, and I think this view is related to that. Personally, I find this view uninspiring.

@Lal
“…When such thoughts creep into the mind, one should immediately get rid of them. That is the basis of Anapana and Satipatthana.”

@sybe07
“I know there are schools, like dzogchen, who teach we do not have to change anything which arises in the mind. The idea is: If we understand that thoughts are mere thoughts, they come and go, we do not have to dispel them. They liberate themselves, they go without a trace.”

I recently listened to a teaching of exactly this: mere observation of phenomena, including thoughts. It wasn’t dzogchen but a Satipatthana teaching. dhammanupassana was taught as mere observation of dhamma (translated as “mental content”) to see them come and go in order to realize the transient, impersonal nature of them.

As an aside, Kāyānupassanā was taught as mindfulness of the body, for example, of walking (lifting a foot, putting it down, lifting the other foot, etc.); breath meditation was taught as anapana as a subsection of Kāyānupassanā.

I did practice this way for quite some time, and did watch things “come and go”, but my problem was the “come” part. Bad thoughts did “go”, but they also “come” again. I did not reach the stage of “…They liberate themselves, they go without a trace.”

So, just a few input, but I do have a question:

For the view of “not caring whether or not there is rebirth”, sort of “taking the 5th on rebirth”, is it a micha ditthi?

Thank you all,
Lang

[cubibobi]

“But those humans had “brahma-like” bodies, and no physical bodies with cells.”

Is this the same as saying that the first humans on earth were human gandhabbas?

[cubibobi]

Lal said:

“Something is in existence at a given moment due to a cause. If the cause is not there, the “thing” or the “entity” is not there. So, during nirodha samapatti, the causes for a gandhabba to exist are not there.”

So nibbana (nirodha samapatti or parinibbana) “happens” when all causes cease, correct?

On the other hand, arahant magga phala comes from causes (eg a person’s cultivation of panna), right?

[cubibobi]

Thank you, Lal, and I just read the post “Nirōdha Samāpatti, Phala Samāpatti, Jhāna, and Jhāna Samāpatti”, which clarifies some more.

So, is it correct to say the following:

1) Nibbana means either Parinibbana or Nirodha Samapatti.
2) Phala Samāpatti, including Arahant phala samāpatti, are still “this world” because there are citta running.

Lang

[cubibobi]

Hi all,

I came across this forum recently. Like the rest of the site, it is greatly educational and particularly timely for me since I recently had a discussion about nibbana with someone, and I’ll call him or her X. I have a few questions, and will phrase them based on a couple of points of discussion I had with X.

1) X said that for a person “in nibbana”, the mind “stops” or “ceases”. Asked to elaborate, X said that for that duration all desires for the mind to grasp at anything in this world are gone, so there is no reason for the mind to exist. I suppose that X meant that there was no citta vithi flowing, but X doesn’t know abhidhamma.

Per our discussion here, I think X must have meant nirodha samapatti, although X doesn’t know these Pali terms, and I now see that this explanation is not adequate: the mind “stops” not just in nirodha samapatti but also in the asanna realm. Thus, the mind “stopping” may nor may not have relationship to nibbana, correct?

2) To X, nibbana is an either/or phenomenon; one is either “in nibbana” or in this world. Again, per our dicussion here, there is a connection between nibbana and this world, in the case of Arahant phala samapatti, i.e. the pabhassara citta (still “this world”) is in contact with nibbana. Is this correct?

Also, elsewhere I have heard of the terms nibbana dhatu. Is nibbana dhatu what is in contact with pabhassara citta during Arahant phala samapatti?

I appreciate any elucidation on these, and I greatly appreciate this forum, since prior to this my view on the nibbana experience was pretty much the same as X’s.

Best,
Lang

[cubibobi]

Fascinating experience!

vilaskadival wrote: ” ..Then suddenly felt was thrown into something and I fell down from my bed and was perplexed on what happened.”

Would that “throwing” be the force of kamma?

[cubibobi]

Another thought, just out of curiosity:

Can devā and brahmā who are attha purisa puggala be included in Sangha?

[cubibobi]

Terrific, so

Sangha = “san” + “gha” ⊃ bhikkhū / ni and bhauddhayā who are attha purisa puggala

… and that’s why we take refuge in Sangha in the Triple Gem? A person who is removing san is a reliable source of refuge, not someone who is accumulating san just like we are.

[cubibobi]

Awesome. “bhava” + “khaya” make great sense. Thank you!

This reminds me of other “bh” words you have explained elsewhere, such as:

buddha = bhava + uddha
bhauddhayā = bhava + uddha + yā

We would not have known on our own that “bhava” was embedded in these words. In fact, for a very long time I really wanted to know what “buddha” really meant, and English translation such as “the enlightened one” or “the awakened one” did not make a strong impression. Knowing “bhava + uddha” makes the meaning clear from the word itself.

It does seem, however, that bhikkhu and bhauddhayā mean the same thing: one who strives to stop bhava; but bhikkhu is someone who has left home, and bhauddhayā is a householder, correct?

[cubibobi]

Hi

I just read the new post:

Kamma are Done with Sankhāra – Types of Sankhāra

Kamma are Done with Sankhāra – Types of Sankhāra

… and I thought this may be the right forum to post a question instead of creating a new forum.

One thing I took away from the post was that sankhāra comes before kamma; if we were to sketch the various flows of things, would the following be accurate pictures (for a normal human):

manō sankhāra → manō kamma

Or

manō sankhāra → vaci sankhāra → vaci kamma

Or

manō sankhāra → kāya sankhāra → kāya kamma

Thank you,
Lang

[Author]

Posts