Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
Again, good Lal, maybe there are ways for him to investigate the matter lesser for this or that “Arahat”. Today people watch many movies.
Suttas are well preserved.
It’s certain risky to gamble in such way in regard of a human existence.
The reasons of holding certain views are well exponent in the first Sutta, the Brahma-net.
So again: What’s called birth by the Buddha and his disciples, it’s definition?
What’s called death?
What’s called existence?
(Samana Johann)
Yes. The “Mahāpadāna Sutta (DN 14)“ provides the lifetimes of humans during the times of previous Buddhas, and those are correct.
- I have seen this issue in several places. Even the Tipitaka Commentaries may not be entirely accurate. Those were composed by Arahants, who are not as knowledgeable as a Buddha. In this case, they used the lifetime known to them. Also, we need to remember that these kinds of details are not connected to wisdom; they are just bits of information.
- Therefore, we must always prioritize the Sutta Pitaka over the other two Pitakas in the Tipitaka.
P.S. We also need to remember that this age limit refers to the lifetime of the physical human body. Human existence may last even for many hundreds of thousands of years, i.e., the lifetime of the “mental body” or “manomaya kaya” or “gandhabba” can be very long. During that time, one can be born with a physical human body numerous times.
Good Lal,
Where does the idea, that “we should remember” come from. Usually death is defined by break apart of the body. Atma wouldn’t say that certain tendencies don’t follow, as there are also many human being with conducts like animals, petas, and also Devas, yet the common used border of end of life doesn’t seem to be else like the body one has taken on.
Or would good Lal say that if one falls into a tendency like a Brahma, yet still human body, that he/she took another existence?
People tend to think that they are human, even think that they (human) then become this or that, something like Disney’s wonders, and so hardly to efforts not to fall down.
It’s wrong view that leads for sure down, causes animal womb, peta, hell.
It’s not a useful idea, such as “i am a human” wandering on, but much better that it’s very, very seldom to gain after death as human, another human existence.
So maybe good Lal likes to investigate that part more deeper, so that it’s nor unfortunately mistaken, and a seldom change gone by feeling to secure in certain relation.
Animal have the tendency to often return, yet even there the main lane is downwardly.
There is a lot of Sakkāyadiṭṭhi potential in this point, and lot of ‘human pride’. Yet in the time now, if looking on how many die even befor leaving womb, of human lifespan isn’t much above 30, if not lesser.
(Samana Johann)
Good householder,
do one not forget that “beings are owner of their actions” is an important aspect of right view.
And returning to sensual sphere requires food, e.g. requires sacrifices, dukkha of others.
And Devas can, could, appear to humans, of what they seldom do, as there are seldom those with required virtue and Nissaya, able to receive encouragement. So why desire to return? Wishing to help plow fields or give birth?
Again burden others womb, birth, pain, blood, learning, feeding, burden others, disease… seeking for gross food, breaking apart.
This path here is for own benefit and that of all others. Good to abond doubt, good to abound desires to gain relay on sensuality ever again.
(Samana Johann)
1 user thanked author for this post.
Sorry, but I am confused. I understood this point: “Paticca Samuppada explains that the idea of an “everlasting self” (a “soul-type” entity) is an illusion. Each “existence” is created by the mind in previous lives. That is how the rebirth process continues.”
So what is the goal?
Good householder,
to end the pointless wandering on from birth, aging, sickness and decay, the everon grasping of what’s lost again, to end the burden of steady sacrificing and arrive at peace, at the deathless, the task with an end done.
This path starts and ends with good deeds, blameless deeds, as it’s the source for blameless joy, required for the path.
(Samana Johann)
For getting the different distinguished, good householder, very traditional cultures still use different verbs for actions of Arahats (even monks) and common people.
There is certain danger if not clearly distinguished. A topic in regard of this (requiring lot of right attention):
‘The Kamma of Arahants’!!
The kamma of the ten-fold path, released kamma.
(btw. years ago suggested Upasaha Lal to start to translate sermons, good to see that such took progress)
(Samana Johann)
Things aren’t but do. Good to do, to hold deeds (kamma) as ones own, to take on just right and pleasing deeds, to go beyond all need of doing. Doing is burdensome, requires steady paccaya. And yes, doing is very individual.
Doing so, gained faith, one is already called a firm person.
(Samana Johann)
Maybe useful in regard of the OP: MN 1: Mulapariyaya Sutta — The Root Sequence
As for now, trainee (and later similar, Satipatthana):
…“He directly knows Unbinding as Unbinding. Directly knowing Unbinding as Unbinding, let him not conceive things about Unbinding, let him not conceive things in Unbinding, let him not conceive things coming out of Unbinding, let him not conceive Unbinding as ‘mine,’ let him not delight in Unbinding. Why is that? So that he may comprehend it, I tell you.
(Samana Johann)
Good householder, not on “guy”, just out of compassion:
It’s good and very needed to see one’s actions as own, make them important, look for it’s beauty and purity, to practice and to abound all of what’s no refuge, including, after having abond objects of identification in the sensual-word, also such as perception, even ideas of Nibbana.
But for now just much care about what’s a useful island, goodness, metta, virtue, purification of Sila, to gain the required Brahma-joy, to be able of refined purification and beyond.
No need to worry about useless identifications which aren’t of much support for doing the task of going beyond Dukkha. Yet that task needs a lot of conceit, a lot of desire for purity, especially when in the mud of sensuality.
Good to stay always by cause and effect and don’t leave the middle path by Papanca.
“To be or not to be” isn’t a releasing question. And no need for further identifications once the deathless, unchanging, is gained
(Samana Johann)
The following is one that was forwarded from one of the Pure Dhamma Korea community.
The realization that the craving for sensual pleasures (kama raga) is the universal cause of suffering in the human realm seems to be the key to eliminating kama raga.
However, it remains a mystery to me how an anagami can eliminate rupa raga, arupa raga, and bhava tanha.
This gives me the impression that I might be missing or misunderstanding a significant part.
On the other hand, I also think it might be correct to leave that mystery aside and focus on ensuring that the first three samyojanas have been thoroughly eliminated and concentrate on removing kama raga.
It might be useful to consider the four kinds of food, good householder, also on how the refined will be removed then.
Puttamansa Sutta: A Son’s Flesh
(Samana Johann)
1 user thanked author for this post.
Hi lal.. I read your article about
What Reincarnates? – Concept of a Lifestream
There (point #4) you write:
” Even after becoming a Bodhisatta, it is possible to be born in the animal realm (but NOT in the other three realms in the apāyās.)”
I found on Wikipedia, during the time of Anomadassi Buddha, the bodhisattva (Gautama Buddha) became Asura..
References
“The Great Chronicles of Buddhas”
Sayadaw, Mingun (1992). The great Chronicles of the Buddhas. Ti=Ni Publishing Center. p. 187.
Is Asura here the realm of Asura or Asura god?
Thanks lal 😊🙏
Good householder,
that’s certain in the realm of the “Four Kings”, Cātumahārājikā.
(btw. there is not really any evidence that a Buddha-to-become might be aware of such, or practices Paramis. It’s nonsensical to go after Buddhahood aware of Buddha-Dhamma. It’s a terrible misleading for those who would have a change to escape suffering here.)
(Samana Johann)
Akusala Citta and Akusala Vipāka Citta
Akusala Vipaka citta can arise from Akusala citta.
Post: ” Five of these akusala vipāka cittā are the ones that lead to (undesirable) sense events through the five physical senses. Thus, they are responsible for eye-consciousness (cakkhu viññāna), ear-consciousness (sota viññāna), nose consciousness (ghāna viññāna), taste consciousness (jivhā viññāna), and body consciousness (kāya viññāna).”
Except for the body consciousness which is accompanied by pain, the other four are accompanied by equanimity”
—
However, we also know that how we react and attach to vipaka depends on our gati at that time. Does this mean that an akusala vipaka citta can potentially bring a pleasurable feeling?
Let’s say in my country giving apples to people is an insult, and I intentionally give apples to other people to insult them. Then this can manifest as a future akusala vipaka citta where I receive apples. However in my next life I like to receive apples. Does this mean I can get pleasure from an akusala vipaka citta?
Also, are arahant’s able to receive akusala vipaka citta? They just don’t get attached to it. Then this also means that akusala vipaka citta will be less potent as one progresses on the path. Eg last time I use to scold people, so that manifest as a vipaka that I will get scolded back. But because of dhamma, I get less upset when someone scolds me.
Goodhouseholder,
No, it’s not the case, that good fruits come from bad deeds, good householder. But heal, as well as neither heal nor pain feelings can follow right after bad deeds. (Upanissaya). That’s very important, and not understanding or having faith that good thinks never araise because of bad causes, and viciversa, is very needed (right view) be able to develop Brahmaviharas and Jhanas.
That doubt is the most burdensome for many in regard of especially developing mudita.
So when seeing a rich person acting bad, a harmful person, happy, don’t one think his gain of wealth is related to bad.
Don’t one think that one might get beaten from the receiver, after giving a gift, comes from good the good deed.
(Just to point out some simple samples, to be clear)
And as Nyom Lal poined out, it’s quite enought to have strong faith in that good brings good, bad, bad, otherwise, if one falls into the analysis line, like the Sublime Buddha warned: leads to getting crazy (certain an “Abhidhamma” dis-ease.
(Samana Johann)
Good householder,
Maybe useful to compare it like food and it’s processing. The more careful of what eating, the more restrain and useful, the lesser burden with it.
The more right view, gratitude and goodwill, the more pleasing and calm dreams, going further to even have no more dreams at all when virtue becomes pure, and especially when mindfulness is well established.
One can give it a try by doing efforts in metta-bhavana and to stay well mindful on certain kammatthan till falling asleep.
The lesser virtue, the more transgressions, the more “hungry” after sensuality, the more troubles with the “belly”.
In this regard, and to this extent, are dreams predicting, and even give some ideas of what can be expect further in such or such way of going on.
(Samana Johann)
1 user thanked author for this post.
Good householders,
it’s maybe important to add that “non-return by giving” would work “just” for those arrived at the stream (eg. right view)
(worthy to note further, that most teachings on giving are also related to insider and lesser in regard to those still outside, in regard of fruits)
(Samana Johann)
1 user thanked author for this post.
Atma wouldn’t share either thieves nor direct others to thieves, yet Nyom’s editor seems to have burden with links.
https://sangham.net/en/tipitaka/sut/kn/j/j10/j479
(Samana Johann)
Kalingabodhi-Jataka (Kāliṅgabodhijātakaṃ) …”This monastery, Sir, is left unprovided while the Tathāgata goes on pilgrimage, and there is no place for the people to do reverence by offering fragrant wreaths and garlands. Will you be so kind, Sir, as to tell the Tathāgata of this matter, and learn from him whether or no it is possible to find a place for this purpose.” The other, nothing loth, did so, asking, “How many shrines are there?” —”Three, Ānanda.” —”Which are they?” —”Shrines for a relic of the body, a relic of use or wear, a relic of memorial [202]” —”Can a shrine be made, Sir, during your life?” —”No, Ānanda, not a body-shrine; that kind is made when a Buddha enters Nirvāna. A shrine of memorial is improper because the connection depends on the imagination only.(?) But the great bo-tree used by the Buddhas is fit for a shrine, be they alive or be they dead.” —”Sir, while you are away on pilgrimage the great monastery of Jetavana °° is unprotected, and the people have no place where they can show their reverence. Shall I plant a seed of the great bo-tree before the gateway of Jetavana?” —”By all means so do, Ānanda, and that shall be as it were an abiding place for me.”… 202: See Hardy, Eastern Monachism, 216 f. The last class is said to be images of the Buddha. (similar in German translations)
(Samana Johann)
2 users thanked author for this post.
