Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
It is because of the fermentation of wrong views (ditthāsava)
1.Fermentation of sense desire (kāmāsava)
2.Fermentation of desire for continued existence (bhavāsava)
3.Fermentation of wrong views (ditthāsava)
4.Fermentation of ignorance (avijjāsava)
A sotāpanna eliminated the third. This kind of unshakable confidence in erroneous beliefs is present among puthujunas. There’s nothing we can do about it, it’s nature. Even a bodhisatta can fall into their trap during his journey.
1 user thanked author for this post.
HAPPINESS IN THERAVADA BUDDHISM
What is happiness?
Happiness is a positive emotion that is experienced when one is pleased. It can be described as an emotional state accompanied by feelings of positive well-being, joy, pleasure, satisfaction, contentment and fulfilment. The Pali word for happiness is “Sukha” which means happiness, pleasure, ease, joy or bliss. All living beings have a natural tendency to enjoy happiness and reject unhappiness. Thus the Buddha has stated that all living beings prefer to experience happy feelings instead of unhappy feelings.
“sabbe sattā sukha-kāmā, dukkha-paṭikkūlā”
“All living beings desire happiness and recoil from suffering.”
In the Mahā Satipatthāna sutta of the Majjhima Nikāya (collection of the Buddha’s middle-length discourses), the Buddha has described two types of happiness associated with feelings. The first is worldly happiness (sāmisa sukha), which is the happy feeling arising from the five sensory bases, and the second is unworldly happiness (nirāmisa sukha), which is the happy feeling that does not arise from the five sensory bases, but from the development of the mind.
In the Nirāmisa sutta of the Samyutta Nikāya, the Buddha has described two levels of unworldly happiness. The first is the unworldly happiness experienced in the first, second and third fine material mental absorptions (rūpāvacara jhana) developed through concentration meditation. The other level of unworldly happiness is called the still greater unworldly happiness (nirāmisa nirāmisataraṁ sukha). That is the unworldly happiness experienced when an enlightened person looks upon the mind that is free from greed, hatred and delusion.
The Buddha has described three unwholesome, unskilful and unprofitable roots of the mind which are the basis for the development of all types of mental defilements that lead to unhappiness and suffering. They are Greed (lobha), hatred (dosa) and delusion (moha). These three roots are deeply embedded in the minds of unenlightened beings acting as the driving force to make them perform unwholesome deeds. The three unwholesome roots which are also described as poisons, will cause one to perform unwholesome physical, verbal and mental actions that can result in unhappiness to the doer as well as to others. In the Kamma Nidhāna sutta of the Anguttara Nikāya (collection of the Buddha’s numerical discourses), the Buddha has stated how the three unwholesome roots condition the performance of the ten unwholesome deeds.
Wholesome or skilful physical, verbal and mental actions which are the opposite actions to the above ten actions, are performed based on the three wholesome roots of non-greed (alobha), non-hatred (adosa) and non-delusion (amoha) and will result in happiness to the doer as well as to the others.
In the Kālāma sutta of the Anguttara Nikāya, addressing a group of residents from the town called Kālāma, the Buddha has stated that a person who is not overcome by the three unwholesome roots will refrain from unwholesome actions resulting in well-being and happiness.
In the Ananya sutta of the Anguttara Nikāya, the Buddha has described four types of happiness that a householder can earn while still enjoying worldly sensual pleasures.
1. The happiness of earning wealth by just and rightful means (atthi sukha)
2. The happiness of using such wealth on the family, friends and meritorious deeds (bhoga sukha)
3. The happiness of being free from debts (anana sukha)
4. The happiness of blamelessness by living a pure life free from unwholesome physical, verbal and mental deeds (anavajja sukha)
The Buddha also stated that the first three types of happiness are not worth a sixteenth part of the happiness of blamelessness by refraining from unwholesome physical, verbal and mental deeds.
When one considers the circumstances of the arising of different kinds of happiness in the discourses discussed above and elsewhere in the Buddhist scriptures, happiness within the Buddhist teaching can be considered to be of three kinds.
1. Sensual happiness (Kama loka/all gratifications with a dense body or finer body like the devas)
2. Mundane spiritual happiness (Rupa and Arupa loka/ Anariya jhanas)
3. Supra mundane spiritual happiness (Magga Phala/ Nibbāna)
Those who have attained the first three supra mundane stages of Stream Enterer, Once Returner and Non-Returner can enjoy the Nibbānic happiness when they experience the fruition of those stages. For a fully enlightened Arahant, Nibbānic happiness is the natural happiness of the mind because an Arahant’s mind is free from any mental defilement. The aim of a disciple of the Buddha should be to cultivate the Buddhist spiritual path of liberation to attain the ultimate supra mundane happiness of Nibbāna, instead of indulging in transient sensual happiness or mundane spiritual happiness that can lead to craving, attachment and continued existence in the cycle of birth and death (samsāra).
- This is a great post from Drarisworld. I didn’t include all the paragraphs because it would have been too much. For more information read the Yoga Sutta and the Nirāmisa Sutta.
1 user thanked author for this post.
TIṀSA SUTTA: DISCOURSE TO THIRTY MONKS
At one time, the Buddha was staying at Rajagaha, in the Bamboo Grove near the Squirrels’ Feeding Place.
Then thirty monks from Pāvā, all forest dwellers, all alms round goers, all users of dust-heap clothes, all triple robe wearers, all still with fetters, went to the Buddha. On arrival, they paid homage to the Buddha and sat to one side.
[It is said in the Buddhist commentaries that this group of thirty forest-dwelling monks was the group of thirty princes who met the Buddha soon after the enlightenment and were ordained as monks. The Buddha was on His way from Varanasi to Rajagaha to meet King Bimbisāra. As the thirty princes were going around looking for a prostitute hired by them who had vanished having stolen their ornaments, they happened to meet the Buddha. The Buddha asked them whether looking around for a thieving prostitute or looking for themselves was more important. Then they listened to the Buddha’s teaching and ordained as Buddhist monks.]
Then, this thought occurred to the Buddha: “These thirty monks from Pava, all forest dwellers, all alms round goers, all users of dust-heap clothes, all triple robe wearers, all still with fetters. What if I were to teach them the Dhamma in such a way that while they are still seated on these very seats, their minds will be freed from fermentations through non-clinging?”
Then, the Buddha addressed the monks: “Monks.”
“Yes, Venerable Sir.” The monks replied.
Then, the Buddha said: “ With an inconceivable beginning is this cycle of birth and death. A beginning point is indiscernible, though beings hindered by ignorance and fettered by craving, are roaming and wandering on.”
“What do you think, monks? Which is greater, the flowing stream of blood that you have shed from having your heads cut off as you roamed and wandered on through this long journey or the water in the four great oceans?”
“Venerable Sir, as we understand the Dhamma as taught by the Blessed One, this flowing stream of blood that we have shed from having our heads cut off as we roamed and wandered on through this long journey, is greater than the water in the four great oceans.”
“What is the reason for this? Monks, With an inconceivable beginning, is this cycle of birth and death. A beginning point is indiscernible, though beings hindered by ignorance and fettered by craving, are roaming and wandering on.”
“For such a long time, monks, you have experienced stress, experienced pain, experienced loss, swelling the graveyards. Monks, this should be enough to become disenchanted with all formations, enough to become dispassionate towards them, enough to be liberated from them.”
This is what the Buddha said. Satisfied, the monks delighted in the words of the Buddha.
While this exposition was being given, the minds of the thirty monks from Pāvā were freed from fermentations through non-clinging.
In the Tiṁsa sutta, the Buddha has given a sermon to a group of thirty forest-dwelling monks whom the Buddha knew were not yet as enlightened as Arahants. According to the Buddhist commentaries, though still not fully enlightened, all the thirty monks had already attained other supra mundane stages of enlightenment such as Stream Enterer (Sotāpañña), Once Returner (Sakadāgāmi), and Non-Returner (Anāgāmi). The Buddha intended to help them eradicate all mental defilements and become fully enlightened as they were still seated near the Buddha. The Buddha has focused the sermon on the immense suffering (dukkha) that sentient beings experience during their endless journey through the beginningless cycle of birth and death (samsāra). The Buddha has referred in particular to the bloodshed that one may have suffered while being born as an animal and during human lives due to various unwholesome actions. As the Buddha has told the thirty monks, a genuine reflection on the suffering one has to endure through the endless cycle of birth and death should be enough for one to become disenchanted and to work with diligence to liberate from suffering and the repeated cycle of birth and death (samsāra).
- This is another sutta that speaks of the infinity of Samsarā. Lord Buddha spoke about the unfound beginning and how we suffered in various bodies. Thanks to this speech, the 30 bhikkhus became arahants at the same time.
- Those who were sotāpanna and sakadagamin must have probably been thinking, “What is the use of following the distorted sanna of Kāma Loka to obtain sensual pleasures? We have been doing this for infinite times and we have never been able to maintain long-term happiness (Annica) and we have remained helpless (Anatta), suffering in the Apayas as animals and other beings(Dukkha).”
- Those who were anagamis probably thought, “What is the point of following the distorted sanna of rupa and arupa loka to enjoy jhanic pleasures? For infinite times we have been doing this but finally, we fell into the belly of a cow, goat, or human in the Kāma loka.” All 30 bhikkhus discovered that there is no refuge in the 31 kingdoms.
- For more explanations read Sotapanna Stage via Understanding Perception (Saññā)
- The destruction of the natural environment is caused by greed (lobha) and ignorance (moha) of the nature of this world. Companies that exploit natural resources are motivated by profit. Money is the primary means of affording sensual pleasures in this world. The vast majority of puthujunas believe that they will be happy in the long term if they enjoy sensual pleasures to the fullest. It is a misunderstanding of tilakkhana that leads to thinking this way.
- By making maximum profit, humans think they will be happy in the long term. The problem is that they perform akusalas in these steps. They wipe out entire species and harm local communities. Sooner or later they will suffer the consequences of these actions. The effects of the climate crisis are consequences visible here and now. Ariya understands that there is no point in engaging in this practice since the nature of this world prevents one from being happy in the long term. Only in the anagami/arahant stages that a person live in the simplest way possible. A sotāpanna/sakadagamin will enjoy sensual pleasures but will try to reduce its impact as best he can. By becoming anagami/arahant, one will no longer want to enjoy sensual pleasures at all. Only at these stages can we fully protect the environment. If all humans became at least sotāpanna, no one would greedily exploit resources. Everyone will only take what they need without harming others.
- The total absence of ignorance (moha), greed (lobha), and anger (dosa) is the true protection. If we want to have a little insight into this way of life, real Bhikkhus are examples. They only consume what they need without wanting to possess it. Unfortunately, in this world, there will always be this kind of problem; this is the unsatisfactory nature of this world! This is why Nibbāna is the only true happiness.
- It’s important to consider the recipient’s disposition when donating. For instance, if a bhikkhu is tempted by luxurious robes, it’s better to offer a simple robe. Similarly, if we know that a bhikkhu has certain attachments, such as a strong liking for refined food, it’s wise to offer simple meals to avoid reinforcing those attachments.
- Even when our intentions are good, we can still make mistakes. For instance, offering money to a bhikkhu is not appropriate. If the bhikkhu accepts the money, it is considered unwholesome. This kind of action can lead to the corruption of the Sangha and the premature decline of the Sasana. That’s why it’s important for lay people to also learn about Vinaya. If a person didn’t know, it’s still an unwholesome action, but the impact will be less. Offering any inappropriate items to the Sangha is not right, even if done with the best intentions.
3 users thanked author for this post.
- Exactly Yash! Offering to the Sangha is much more meritorious than offering to a single Bhikkhu. Even Lord Buddha told his adoptive mother that she would get more merit by offering it to the Sangha than to him alone. Read the Dakkhiṇāvibhaṅgasutta. It is not for nothing that it is said that the Sangha is the supreme field of merit. A person who offers to the Sangha with a pure heart and a good understanding of the Dhamma accumulates an immeasurable amount of Kusulas. You can see many arahants recounting how they offered donations in the Sasanas of the past. Read the Thera and Theri Gatha.
Sangha Vandana
Supati-panno Bhagavato sâvaka sangho, Ujupati-panno Bhagavato sâvaka sangho.
Ñâya-patipanno Bhagavato sâvaka sangho. Sâmici-patipanno Bhagavato sâvaka sangho
Yadidam cattâri purisa yugâni attha-purisa-puggalâ Esa Bhagavato sâvaka sangho.
Âhu-neyyo, pâhu-neyyo, Dakkhi-neyyo,añjalikaraniyo, anuttaram puññakkhetam lokassâti
1 user thanked author for this post.
Sir Lal, many Buddhists hold the belief that ariyas are never reborn in the arupa loka. This belief is based on the idea that Lord Buddhas never taught in those worlds. For them, the highest world that an ariya can reach is Akaniṭṭha loka, the highest pure land. Is there any evidence from the Suttas that contradicts this belief?
“But Venerable Sir, are there gods?”
“Great king, why do you ask: ‘Venerable Sir, are there gods’?”
“Venerable Sir, I am asking whether the gods come back to this life or whether they do not.”
“Great king, those gods who are subject to affliction come back to this life, whereas those gods who are not afflicted do not come to this life.”
When this was said, General Vidūdabha said to the Buddha: “Venerable Sir, can those gods who are subject to affliction and who come back to this life, topple or banish from their place those gods who are not afflicted and who do not come back to this life?”
Then Venerable Ānanda thought: “This General Vidūdabha is the son of King Pasenadi of Kosala, and I am the son of the Blessed One. Now is the time for one son to talk to the other son.” So Venerable Ānanda turned to General Vidūdabha and said: “General, I will ask you a counter-question. Answer it as you see fit. What do you think, general? As far as the kingdom of King Pasenadi of Kosala extends, where he rules as the sovereign king, is he able to topple or banish any ascetic or Brahmin from that place regardless of whether they are good or bad, or whether they follow the holy life or not?”
“Sir, as far as the kingdom of King Pasenadi of Kosala extends, where he rules as the sovereign king, he can topple or banish any ascetic or Brahmin from there regardless of whether they are good or bad, or whether they follow the holy life or not.”
“What do you think, general? As far as the kingdom of King Pasenadi of Kosala does not extend, where he does not rule as the sovereign king, is he able to topple or banish any ascetic or Brahmin from that place regardless of whether they are good or bad, or whether they follow the holy life or not?”
“Sir, as far as the kingdom of King Pasenadi of Kosala does not extend, where he does not rule as the sovereign king, he is not able to topple or banish any ascetic or brahmin from that place regardless of whether they are good or bad, or whether they follow the holy life or not?”
“And what do you think general, have you heard of the gods of the Thirty-three?”
“Yes, Sir, I have heard of the gods of the Thirty-three. And King Pasenadi of Kosala has also heard of them.”
“General, what do you think? Can King Pasenadi of Kosala topple or banish the gods of the Thirty-three from there?”
“Sir, King Pasenadi of Kosala cannot even see the gods of the Thirty-three. So how can he ever topple them or banish them from there?”
“In the same way, general, those afflicted gods who come back to this life, cannot even see those gods who are not afflicted and who do not come back to this life. So how can they topple them or banish them from there?”
Now, Venerable Sir, are there Brahmas?”
“Great king, why do you ask: ‘Venerable Sir, are there Brahmas’?”
“Venerable Sir, I am asking whether the Brahmas come back to this life or whether they do not.”
“Great king, those Brahmas who are subject to affliction come back to this life, whereas those Brahmas who are not afflicted do not come to this life.”
- Here is a Sutta that supports what Sir Lal was saying in several posts and this post Ariya Jhāna and Anariya Jhāna – Main Differences. See the #5 and 6.
- In this Sutta, Lord Buddha told King Pasenadi that certain devas never return to the human world, while others do. It can be deduced that he was referring to the sakadagamins or sotāpannas who progress to Nibbāna in the deva worlds. He also made a distinction between the Brahmas – some return to this world, while others never do. This refers to the anagamis in the pure lands, but some sotāpannas and sakadagamins have cultivated the jhanas and will attain Nibbāna in the Rūpa loka.
- Here is the reference on Sutta Central Kaṇṇakatthalasutta.
“Ye te, mahārāja, devā sabyābajjhā te devā āgantāro itthattaṁ, ye te devā abyābajjhā te devā anāgantāro itthattan”ti.
“Yo so, mahārāja, brahmā sabyābajjho so brahmā āgantā itthattaṁ, yo so brahmā abyābajjho so brahmā anāgantā itthattan”ti.
Thank you very much for this detailed explanation, Sir🙏🏿.
- During my time as a temporary bhikkhu in Thailand, The bhikkhus said that “Lord Buddha Gautama transcended all the bodies of Samsarā”. At first, I didn’t understand this concept and thought that it only occurred during parinibbānna. Now it’s clear!
Thank you for the explanations, Sir !!
Sir Lal: “A Buddha (or an Arahant) had transcended the human realm, even though born a human.
Even though the physical body that he was born with died, the Tathāgata status was attained at the Buddhahood. Those four questions are asked with the wrong assumption that the physical body was the Buddha.”
- Thank you for highlighting this point, Sir🙏🏿. It’s a deeper point that many people, including myself, will need to think about and assimilate.
TEN UN-ANSWERED QUESTIONS (AVYĀKATA) OF LORD GAUTAMA BUDDHA
In the Panha Vyākarana sutta of the Anguttara Nikāya (collection of the Buddha’s numerical discourses), the Buddha has described four different ways of answering questions that the Buddha Himself seems to have practised. They are:
1. Questions to be answered categorically such as yes or no (ekamsa vyākaranīya).
2. Questions to be answered analytically in detail (vibhajja vyākaranīya).
3. Questions that need a counter-question (patipuccha vyākaranīya).
4. Questions to be left aside without answering (thapanīya).
There are many occasions recorded in the Buddhist scriptures when Lord Gautama Buddha has resorted to the fourth way of responding to a question by maintaining silence or by saying that those questions were not declared by the Buddha. As recorded in several discourses, the Buddha was asked a list of ten questions by several people, for which the Buddha has not provided any answers. For example, in the Aggi Vacchagotta sutta of the Majjhima Nikāya (collection of the Buddha’s middle-length discourses), a wanderer named Vacchagotta went to the Buddha and asked whether the Buddha held the following ten views:
1. The world is eternal.
2. The world is not eternal.
3. The world is finite.
4. The world is infinite.
5. The soul and the body are the same thing.
6. The soul is one thing and the body another.
7. After death, a Tathāgata exists.
8. After death, a Tathāgata does not exist.
9. After death, a Tathāgata both exists and does not exist.
10. After death, a Tathāgata neither exists nor does not exist.
The Buddha responded by saying that the Buddha did not hold any such views and gave the following reasons for not holding such views.
“It is a thicket of views, a wilderness of views, a contortion of views, a writhing of views, a fetter of views. It is accompanied by suffering, distress, despair, and fever, and it does not lead to disenchantment, dispassion, cessation, to calm, direct knowledge, full awakening and Nibbana.”
Out of the ten unanswered questions, the first four questions deal with the world: Whether the world is eternal or not eternal and whether the world is finite or infinite. The next two questions deal with the issue of assuming the presence of a permanent entity called a self or a soul in sentient beings. The two questions are whether the body and the soul are the same or two different things. The last four questions are related to the issue of whether a Tathāgata exists after death or not. In the commentarial literature, there are two explanations for the term “Tathāgata”. One explanation is that Tathāgata means a fully awakened, liberated person such as a Buddha or an Arahant. The other explanation is that it refers to any living being (satta). Out of the two explanations, it is more likely that the word “Tathāgata” refers to an enlightened person rather than to any living being. It should be noted that the Buddha may have been asked these ten questions because, the other sectarian religious leaders and their followers in India during the time of the Buddha, were preoccupied with philosophical and metaphysical issues related to these ten questions.
- The post is too long to post in full. I will put the relevant suttas that were cited to support the article.
Majjhima Nikāya called Cūla Mālunkyaputta, Moggallāna sutta of the Samyutta Nikāya, Vacchagotta sutta of the Samyutta Nikāya, Khema sutta of the Samyutta Nikāya, Anurādha sutta of the Samyutta Nikāya,Aggi Vacchagotta sutta of the Majjhima Nikāya.
In the Buddhist literature, several speculative views have been expressed as to why the Buddha declined to answer those ten unanswered questions. One view is that the Buddha perhaps did not know the answers to those questions. Lord Gautama Buddha was a Samma Sambuddha who attained enlightenment and Buddhahood through his efforts with no assistance from any teacher. A Samma Sambuddha is believed to possess six extraordinary super knowledges that no one else possesses and one of them is the Buddha’s Omniscience (Sabbannuta nāna). The term “Sabbannu” is made up of two parts, “Sabba” meaning “All” and “Nu” meaning “Knowledge” or “Knowing”. Hence, the Buddha possessed the knowledge of everything that needed to be known. So, it is not unreasonable to assume that the Buddha must have known the answers to those ten questions and has decided not to discuss them for some reason, and the exact reason was known only to the Buddha Himself. But we can gather some evidence from the Buddhist scriptures as to why the Buddha may not have answered those ten unanswered questions.
In the Simsāpā sutta of the Samyutta Nikāya, the Buddha picked up a few simsāpā leaves with his hand and asked the monks which was more numerous; the few simsāpā leaves in the hand or all the leaves in the simsāpā forest. The monks answered that the leaves in the hand were few and that all the leaves in the forest were far more numerous. The Buddha said that in the same way, those things that the Buddha has known through direct knowledge but has not taught are far more numerous than what the Buddha has taught. It was because those things were not connected to the holy life and would not lead to one’s liberation from suffering. This is a clear statement from the Buddha that what the Buddha taught to others is minute compared to the vast knowledge that the Buddha has known through direct knowledge.
- Is it true that we should leave these 10 questions aside or can some of them be accessible?
SAMBUDDHA SUTTA: DIFFERENCE BETWEEN A SAMMĀ SAMBUDDHA AND AN ARAHANT
There, the Buddha addressed the monks:
“Monks, the Tathāgata, the Arahant, the Perfectly Awakened One, who is liberated by non-clinging through disenchantment, dispassion, and cessation regarding form, is called a Perfectly Enlightened One.”
“A monk, liberated by wisdom, who is also liberated by non-clinging through disenchantment, dispassion, and cessation regarding form, is called one liberated by wisdom.”
“Monks, the Tathāgata, the Arahant, the Perfectly Awakened One, who is liberated by non-clinging through disenchantment, dispassion, and cessation regarding feeling, is called a Perfectly Enlightened One.”
“A monk, liberated by wisdom, who is also liberated by non-clinging through disenchantment, dispassion, and cessation regarding feeling, is called one liberated by wisdom.”
“Monks, the Tathāgata, the Arahant, the Perfectly Awakened One, who is liberated by non-clinging through disenchantment, dispassion, and cessation regarding perception, is called a Perfectly Enlightened One.”
“A monk, liberated by wisdom, who is also liberated by non-clinging through disenchantment, dispassion, and cessation regarding perception, is called one liberated by wisdom.”
“Monks, the Tathāgata, the Arahant, the Perfectly Awakened One, who is liberated by non-clinging through disenchantment, dispassion, and cessation regarding mental formations, is called a Perfectly Enlightened One.”
“A monk, liberated by wisdom, who is also liberated by non-clinging through disenchantment, dispassion, and cessation regarding mental formations, is called one liberated by wisdom.”
“Monks, the Tathāgata, the Arahant, the Perfectly Awakened One, who is liberated by non-clinging through disenchantment, dispassion, and cessation regarding consciousness, is called a Perfectly Enlightened One.”
“A monk, liberated by wisdom, who is also liberated by non-clinging through disenchantment, dispassion, and cessation regarding consciousness, is called one liberated by wisdom.”
“Monks, what then, is the difference between the Tathāgata, the Arahant, the Perfectly Awakened One, and the monk who is liberated by wisdom?”
“Venerable Sir, our teachings are rooted in the Blessed One, guided by the Blessed One, have the Blessed One as the refuge. Venerable Sir, it would be good, if the Blessed One were to clarify the meaning of this. Having heard the Blessed One, the monks will remember it.”
“Well then, monks, listen and pay close attention, I will speak.”
“Yes, Venerable Sir.” The monks replied.
“Monks, the Tathāgata, the Arahant, the Perfectly Awakened One, gave rise to the un-arisen path, caused the unborn path to be born, and explained the unexplained path. He is the knower of the path, the discoverer of the path, the expert on the path. And monks, His disciples now dwell as followers of that path, accomplishing it afterwards.”
“Monks, this is the difference between the Tathāgata, the Arahant, the Perfectly Awakened One, and the monk who is liberated by wisdom.”
- It is interesting to see, in this sutta, that Lord Buddha speaks of only one type of arahant (Paññāvimutta). Of course, this is not the only type of arahant. Other reference:Sammāsambuddhasutta
1 user thanked author for this post.
