[Dipobhasadhamma]

Hello Lal,
<br><be>
Buddha’s experiences with Angulimala was a particularly special teaching for me for understanding the power of the Buddha Dhamma…on some people. Knowing what I know now, after studying the Buddha Dhamma, and practicing the Eightfold Path, I can understand HOW the Buddha Dhamma can have the effect it did with someone like Angulimala; when one’s ignorance about the nature of reality is completely eradicated. For me, well…there is no turning back, it would be utterly impossible. Once the vale of ignorance is lifted by experience, an you see the world with new knowledge, the road behind you simple disappears.

Sometimes in my papers, I find that if I do not use the Sanksrit word, people get confused until I explain the different. This is usually the case with the word karma and prajna. There are many famous Mahayana monks and nuns in the West that have caused such to become household words. I usually take the time to explain the difference between the Pali & Sanskrit. I am curious to know the sutta associated with your mention: “The Buddha prohibited the use of the Sanskrit language to teach Buddha Dhamma.” That would be a useful sutta to know.

Paticca Samuppada (Dependent Co-arising/Dependent Origination): पटिच्चसमुप्पाद Yes, I am familiar with this. I understand it to be the causal genesis (if you will) of all things. I try and always figure out the meaning of a Pali word from its concatenated parts. Like pati-icca-sama-uppada. When examining the construction of the Pali language, which I understand is close to the Magadhi Pakrit language, it is no wonder why the Buddha chose the common vernacular language to teach with rather than the Brahmi or Sanskrit languages.

(See: “Ashokan India was speaking Prakrit and not Sanskrit Hindutwavadis like to project that the main stream of Indian thought flows through Sanskrit. This is totally false, as can be seen by historical evidences of epigraphs. Original inscriptions were not Sanskrit. Apart from Ashoka’s edicts, the most ancient inscriptions of Arekmedu, which talk of Buddha’s teachings, were not in Sanskrit but in Prakrit. Another European authority Dr. J. Filliozat is worth quoting in this respect. http://www.ambedkar.org/brahmanism/BRAHMANISM_CONTROLLED_MASSES_THROUGH_LANGUAGE.htm ]
[See also interesting note by
Thanissaro Bhikkhu: https://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/authors/thanissaro/bmc2.pdf (“Note Cv.V.33.1”)

[pati: https://dsal.uchicago.edu/cgi-bin/app/pali_query.py?qs=pa%E1%B9%ADi&searchhws=yes&matchtype=exact%5D
[icca: https://dsal.uchicago.edu/cgi-bin/app/pali_query.py?qs=icca&matchtype=default%5D
[sama: https://dsal.uchicago.edu/cgi-bin/app/pali_query.py?qs=sama&searchhws=yes&matchtype=exact%5D
[uppada (उप्पाद): https://dsal.uchicago.edu/cgi-bin/app/pali_query.py?qs=upp%C4%81da&searchhws=yes&matchtype=exact%5D

With regard to “the outline:” You had made the following statement in an earlier comment, but I see now that I must have misunderstood what you meant.

“I am just trying to get an idea of how to make an outline. If you don’t like to discuss those details, I understand. But without some sort of background, I am afraid I cannot help much.”

With regard to:
<br><br>
“I wish more people would spend time as you do critically examining the teachings of the Buddha. Most “teachers” of Buddha Dhamma in the Western world today just translate deep suttas word by word (using outdated dictionaries) and that has produced awful results.”

My response:
<br><br>
I find that the more I understand the Buddha Dhamma, the more protective of it I become. Most Western Buddhists would do well to drop Buddhism (the religion concept) and focus on the Buddha Dhamma. Buddha-ism, to me, has the same effect on the Buddha Dhamma as the Sanskrit. Westerner’s do what Westerners always do: If something appears to have a value they will find a way to commoditize it for profit, which of course completely changes the purpose and value of the Buddha Dhamma. Sometimes, in regard to this, I feel very alone in the West indeed.

I am happy that you are enjoying the paper I wrote. Of course, it could have been a lot longer and more involved, but as I said before, my target audience is people who have little to no knowledge of the Buddha or his teachings.

With metta,
Dipo

[Dipobhasadhamma]

Lal,

Your answer to my question #1. was very helpful. In your last reply to my question #2: “Consciousness can be there without a brain.” Yes, this I already understand. I think of the combination of consciousness & kamma as a person’s Kammic Profile, so-to-speak. Another analogy I might use is that one’s Kammic (karmic) Profile is like an energy investment account. A person can make good/beneficial investments, and bad/un-beneficial investments to their portfolio. The overall dominant type of investments defines the account (profile). Compared to an account with mostly bad investments producing negative results, an account with good investments will produce positive results.

I look forward to this outline you mention. I was thinking of something similar, like a sort of time-line/graphical representation. Like a stream of causation beginning with Kamma Energy, followed by hadaya vathu, followed by manomaya-kaya/gandhabba. Following is a graphic representation of Conditioning/Cause & Effect I created for one of my papers. I was trying to imagine something similar to represent the causal chain of consciousness.

In metta,
Dipo

[Dipobhasadhamma]

Note: Please keep in mind that my target audience of the things that I write are Westerner’s whose knowledge of Buddha’s teachings spans from limited to no knowledge. I do not get as technical with the Pali language as you do in the things that I write. My readership base comes from various Web sites that I run. I am the Administrator for the Pema Chodron Facebook site. I also have my own Fecebook site (Panna Journey). At present I am the president of a Buddhist not for profit organization known as the Panna Foundation for Buddhist Studies.

Pema Chodron: https://www.facebook.com/groups/pemachodron

Panna Journey: https://www.facebook.com/groups/prajnajourney

Panna Foundation: https://www.facebook.com/groups/pannafoundation

[Dipobhasadhamma]

Dear Lal,

Since I am 67 years old now, I have had a large life full of various experiences. However, I will keep the answers to your questions as brief as I can and still provide you with a idea of who and what I am. I was born in the US, first generation. I inherited my religion from my family and so my religious life began very young. I attended many Catholic seminaries to become a priest. I later converted to several other Christian sects.

My university studies began with Law in Boston, Massachusetts. I switched to Ancient History with the intent of becoming a professor. through my studies in history, archaeology, anthropology, philosophy, et al, were all instrumental in opening my eyes to the futility of religion. I later became very involved in business and became the co-founder and CEO of a California Computer Corporation (USNexus) for 5 years, after which I became the Director of Internet Technology at Lawrence Livermore Labs, and then a CTO of a Los Angeles, California corporation.

I am not writing a thesis on Buddhism. Many years ago, after semi-retirement, I happened on the teachings of the Buddha. I was very struck by the profundity of them, and so entered a Zen Monastery in 2015, finishing only ten vows before I had to leave. My mother became quite ill and as she had no one else to care for her, it was up to me to see that she finished her lifetime with some dignity. While at the Zen Monastery I became somewhat jaded with the Mahayana (Zen) tradition because its practices seemed quite similar to Catholicism. I changed my focus to the Theravada tradition. I consider that although we cannot be 100% sure of what the Buddha actually said, I have confidence in the consistency of the main body of teachings that have survived for 2500 years. I will send you a paper that I recently published and is awaiting peer review. My long-term goal is to find a Theravada Monastery that will accept an older person, otherwise I will be a true Anacaryiako. At present I teach meditation instruction at a local public center.

I am guessing that I must not have used the best words to describe what I wrote regarding kamma. I have actually written several papers about kamma, and the various types of kamma. [Kamma & Rebirth https://archive.org/details/kamma-rebirth-2021-updt/mode/1up%5D

If you like, you can see some of the things that I have written at the following:

ResearchGate
https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Depabhasadhamma-Anacaryiako
Academia
https://independent.academia.edu/depobhasadhamma
Internet Archive
https://archive.org/details/@depabhasadhamma

The most recent paper published: Is Buddhism Religion? Why it Matters
https://archive.org/details/is-buddhism-religion-updated/mode/1up

Hope that helps you a bit.
Dipo

[Dipobhasadhamma]

…I failed to add…

In your explanation to my initial post you stated”
2. Following is the explanation in Buddha Dhamma: Consciousness arises in the “seat of the mind” (hadaya vatthu), which is created by kammic energy. – That hadaya vatthu is the critical component of the manomaya kaya (gandhabba).

If consciousness arises in the seat of the mind (hadaya vatthu), does this mean that “mind” precedes consciousness? Additionally, does this mean that mind is not the resulting effect of the convergence of consciousness and brain?

My limited viewpoint, which might be purely theoretical constructed from an intellectual and philosophical standpoint, but:
1. Since energy can never be created or destroyed and is a fundamental constant in the Universe:
a. Consciousness must be a fundamental element of the Universe.
b. Kammic energy must also be a fundamental element of the Universe, but is more focused.
2. Kammic energy is only possible with the convergence of consciousness and brain, which causes mind.
3. Gandhabba, a very small unit of energy, which is also subject to the Laws of the Conservation of Energy, is the wire, if you will, that allows the connection of “a” consciousness with “a” body (brain).
4. Rebirth: It is the constancy of the energies of kamma, gandhabbha, mana, etc. that keeps the wheel of rebirth in operation, barring of course an intervention of nibbana.

Is gandhabba not the link, the gap, between “a” consciousness and “a” brain. Is the seat of the mind (hadaya yatthu) not in fact triggered by the gandhabba?

In metta,
Dipo

[Dipobhasadhamma]

Dearest Lal,

Thank you for the reply. Yes, I do realize that science can, and may only ever be able to provide a physical, perhaps Quantum (such as the micro tubules theory) materialist explanation of consciousness. If there were a way in which the entire corpus of the Buddha’s knowledge about consciousness, could somehow create (big idea) a new science; a science that would consider the Buddha’s knowledge, using that knowledge to posit more “what if’s.” What if science knew and understood the concepts which you have described (“Consciousness arises in the “seat of the mind” (hadaya vatthu), which is created by kammic energy. That hadaya vatthu is the critical component of the manomaya kaya (gandhabba).”)?

Of course this may merely describe that line between philosophy and science that becomes blurred at times (The Double-Slit Experiment: Both physical & philosophical elements). And, use or consideration by science of such Dhamma information may only serve to further muddy the waters of understanding.

Now, science may not be able to devise a Quantum Field Theory for ghandhabba, but if science at least considered the “action” involved (spooky action at a distance); the energy of gandhabba, kamma, etc, might this not result in more intuitive “what if’s?” Or, is our science-mind not ready to think outside the classical box just yet? Surely some scientists, it appears, are beginning to realize that the study of consciousness requires something more than the physical sciences. Psychology is not able to provide the laboratory because it is dependent on physical science.

I imagine that I must understand what it felt like for Steven Hawking envisioning the existence of black holes. He knew they were there. Perhaps feeling that he just didn’t have the right questions that would lead him to a viable answer. There is an explanation of consciousness for one who understands the Buddha Dhamma. But, could not this Buddha Dhamma greatly benefit some scientists to at least consider kammic energy (from the perspective of the First Law of Thermodynamics), and the minute, smaller than an atom energy of gandhabba? If nothing else, couldn’t or wouldn’t this Buddha Dhamma result in a more plausible “what if?”

I am not certain that I am making sense to you, but as was said in an old Bugs Bunny cartoon: “I live in my own little world. But it’s okay, because everyone here knows me.”

With metta,
Dipo

[Dipobhasadhamma]

…Additionally, might I ask: If you had to come up with a Pali word or concept that would address or describe the “gap” between a brain and consciousness when “a mind” becomes active, what would that word or concept be?

In metta,
Dipo

[Dipobhasadhamma]

Thank you Lal. I appreciate the reply. I now have a better understanding. Now, what do the texts call a person who, let’s say, has achieved sotapanna, is not an ordained monk, but who has taken 8 or 10 precepts, studies the Dhamma intensely, and teaches publicly? Is there such a description in the Suttas?

With Metta,
Dipobhasadhamma

[Dipobhasadhamma]

Dear Lal,
Once again your knowledge of the Pali language solves the problem. I originally obtained the word while searching for information about “mental constructs” and came across the word parakippana. However, I was not certain that this is a Sanskrit rendering, but I could not find it anywhere in the Suttas. The meaning of the word from Sutta Central states that the meaning is “intention; assumption; supposition.” From the Pali Text Society: “preparation, intention, stratagem Th 1, 940. — 2. assumption, supposition, surmise A i.197; v.271; DhsA 308. (https://dsal.uchicago.edu/cgi-bin/app/pali_query.py?qs=parikappa&searchhws=yes&matchtype=exact). All of which are mental constructs. I suppose that the Pali words ” manokamma,” “sankhara,” “cetasika,” “cintana” or “cetanā” could also be used to describe a “mental construct” or mentation. Again, thank you for your fastidious attention to your Forum. It is ery much appreciated.

Dipobhasadhamma

[Author]

Posts