[sybe07]

Hi,

Maybe it is not really what you are looking for C. Saket, but these sutta’s deal with the question why some people attain Nibbana and others not:

https://suttacentral.net/en/sn35.118
https://suttacentral.net/en/an4.179
https://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/mn/mn.107.horn.html

In general, sutta’s mention there are really many things which are not conducive for realising Nibbana and those are, in fact, quit normal things, like beings longing for and involvement in sense-pleasures or even subtle mental states. But also immoral behaviour in thoughts, verbally and in deeds. Holding on to speculative views and wrong views. How many lives did we had the right mundane views? Attachment to equanimity. Shamelessness. No fear for wrong doing. Enjoying personal existence (love for samsara?). The five nivarana’s. Regarding Nibbana as mine or as who i am, etc.

A very nice sutta, i find is SN35.241. It gives a beautiful simile of the great log: https://suttacentral.net/en/sn35.241

it shows how a great log in the River Ganges can lead all the way to the sea (nibbana) but can also not arrive there. In a very nice way it shows what are the obstacles for realising Nibbana.

Hang in there!

Siebe

[sybe07]

Yes, thanks Lal.

I feel in myself there is a struggle going on for decades.

There is, as it were, this worldly Siebe, this worldly man with so much fire, eagerness, passion, desires, hopes, dreams, big expactations of this world.

This mindstream can be very strong. I call this sometimes ‘the child-inside me’. A part of me wants to be childish. It does not want to awaken. It does not want to see things as they are. It wants to dream. It enjoys being intoxicated, not by drugs or liquor, but intoxicated with dreams, hopes, desires etc. It has the perception of nicca. It holds on to it and does not want to loose it.

It can become destructive, drag down wisdom and the Triple Gem, drag down Lal, it can become quit obstinate…and yes, it can enjoy that too. I think it’s not oke, but it is there.

So i can see there is a habitual resistence to awaken and obstinate tendencies to ripen, but there is also a longing to awaken, to find the Truth.
Both manifest as struggle.

I know by now forcing too much is not good too. This you teach too in your posts i read. Things have to develop naturally.

I have accepted that this struggle is apparantly my way. It’s not really a conscious choice to struggle. Digesting Buddha-Dhamma comes with Siebe burping sometimes and getting cramps, but in a deeper sense i feel i am on the right track. Sometimes there maybe an outburst of burps, but i do not give op.

Your posts on your website are helpful for me in digesting Budddha-Dhamma.
Much merit to you!

kind regards,
Siebe

[sybe07]

I think a real obstacle is also the world around us.

Society is like a dream-factory. It is not designed on anicca-sanna. It is designed on nicca-sanna. One has to dream of happiness, a better world, getting this or that. And we are sensitive for this tempting messages which are everywhere seen and heard. It is overwhelmingly present.

I think most people see, in some way, maybe not very strong, anicca, dukkha and also anatta. I do not think we see the total picture but we are not fully unaware of anicca, dukkha and anatta too without a Buddhha . Maybe we do not see it in all its aspects and depths, but we are not fully unaware. On the contrary!

But what is unique, i belief, is that the Buddha teaches that those three perceptions do not have to make us sad, depressed, anxious, but the Buddha taught that in fact these three perceptions are the three gateways to liberation. I think that is unique. That is, i think, not our collective understanding.

The tendency in society is that the commonly felt and seen perceptions of anicca, dukkha and anatta are not allowed to be true. This might even be true among friends or in a family. They are seen as perceptions of a sick mind, a hopeless mind, a depressed mind, a negative mind.

So, one is more or less urged/forced to set these kind of perceptions aside as soon possible. Forget it.

I belief the Buddha shows a better Path.

Siebe

[sybe07]

Clear, thank you.

siebe

[sybe07]

Aha:-) Sometimes i understand something.

Lal, do you think (or know), the natural bhavanga can this be troubled? Is it possible that a human being, for example, has some background that is just dark, negative? Not as a temporary bhavanga but as a kind of background that is always there and at best hided by the presence of temporary positive mental factors?

kind regards,
Siebe

[sybe07]

Apart from what is the best translation, which i cannot judge, i feel, the way Lal treats the Tilakkhana is the best.

It has become quit obvious to me that teachings on the Tilakkhana have to lead to the understanding that we cannot maintain anything conditioned to our satisfaction or wish. The conditioned, in the end, cannot provide happiness too and cannot function as a refuge.

A sutta desribes this understanding of the Buddha in this way that he destinguished a not noble search and a noble search. The nobel search is describes as (in my own words); self being subject to birth, aging, sickness and death one has to search of what is not subject to birth, aging, sickness and death.

Most people do not search that. They aim there hopes and expactions on the conditioned, this world.

The teachings on the Tilakkhana, i belief, have to turn the mind to this right, nobel search and end the not nobel search, because that is in the end useless. The right search is the search for the Unconditioned, the deathless, Nibbana.

The teachings on the Tilakkhana will make us more realistic, at least that is, i belief, what can happen. Our wordly desires can decrease. We can see more clearly what is beneficial. But i know from experience the habit to keep on dreaming is strong.

If someone would teach this tilakkhana just as three objective facts of life, without really making the connection with ourselves, with our desires, with our hopes, it is quit useless. I think this is what happens a lot in buddhism.

Lal’s explanation makes that connection immediately. That is, i find, very very good. It is very beneficial. I am grateful to have seen this and learned this from Lal.

Siebe

[sybe07]

Thanks Lal. Unfortunately I do not know that sutta. Do you, or somebody else, have a reference?

Lal, would you be so kind to express in your own words what breaktrough to sotapanna stage means?

The text say one sees: ‘all that is subject to arising is subject to cessation’ but what does this in a practical sense mean?
Does this refer to seeing anicca, dukkha and anatta and how unfruitful it is to look for happiness and refuge in the conditioned?

Do you agree the breaktrough is a live-changing event or is it not that dramatic?

Siebe

[sybe07]

Hi Lal,

I think i understand this two kinds of bhava’s. For me it is very useful to learn this. For many interpretations do miss this second kind of understanding of bhava.

The second meaning of of bhava refers to a temporary state of mind like becoming violent or depressed for many days upon a death loved one.

But i get a little bit confused when it seems bhavanga can also refer to such a temporary state of mind. You say: “On the other hand, when one’s mind is deeply affected by some event like in the examples we mentioned above, then the mind goes into a “temporary bhavanga state” corresponding to that event (“state of rage” when really angry or “state of sadness” upon the death of a loved one). We can denote this by BT”.

So it seems, but maybe i misunderstand, the second kind of bhava is the same as Bt?

Do you see what i mean? I wonder, what is the difference between the second meaning of bhava and temporary bhavanga?

kind regards,
Siebe

[sybe07]

I like to share this with you and ask for your comment.

It seems like realising Sotapanna stage in the sutta’s is expressed in different ways:

-1. arising of the spotless vision of the Dhamma, or arising spotless Dhamma-eye.

I find it remarkable that in all those places where this is mentioned (MN56§18, SN13.1, SN35.74, (DN2§102), DN3§2.21, DN5§29, DN14§3.15, DN21§2.10) the context is that someone listens to a dhamma-talk and this arising of the spotless dhamma-eye at that moment happens.

To give an example (MN, Bodhi), in MN56§18 it is said this way:

“Then the Blessed One gave the householder Upali progressive instruction, that is, talk on giving, talk on virtue, talk on the heavens; he explained the danger, degradation, and defilement in sensual pleasures and the blessing of renunciation. When he knew that the householder Upali’s mind [380] was ready, receptive,free from hindrances, elated, and confident, he expounded to him the teaching special to the Buddhas: suffering, its origin, its cessation, and the path. Just as a clean cloth with all marks removed would take dye evenly, so too, while the householder Upali sat there, the spotless immaculate vision of the Dhamma arose in him: “All that is subject to arising is subject to cessation.”

So the spotless dhamma-eye sees or knows ‘all that is subject to arising is subject to cessation.”

Although not specifically mentioned in the sutta’s, according Bodhi (MN, note 588) and Walshe (DN, note 140) this refers to stream-entrence.

I wonder, do you agree?

And, what do you think it means when it is said that the spotless dhamma-eye arises which sees ‘All that is subject to arising is subject to cessation“? Does someone experience cessation at that moment? Some people say one glimpses Nibbana? What dot you think?

In what way is this insight– ‘All that is subject to arising is subject to cessation.”–such a big event, such a breaktrough? I think it cannot be some kind of intellectual understand, or? What do you think?

So what is really seen at that moment? For me this is the question.

-2. Breakthrough to the Dhamma.

To give an example (SN, Bodhi), in SN46.30 it is said:

“Then, venerable sir, while I was staying in an empty hut following along with the surge and decline of the five aggregates subject to clinging, I directly knew as it really is: ‘This is suffering’; I directly knew as it really is: ‘This is the origin of suffering’; I directly knew as it really is: ‘This is the cessation of suffering’; i directly knew as it really is: ‘This is the way leading to the cessation of suffering.’ I have made the breakthrough to the Dhamma, venerable sir, and have obtained the path which when I have developed and cultivated it, will lead me on, while I am dwelling in the appropriate way, to such a state that I shall understand: ‘Destroyed is birth, the holy life has been lived, what had to be done’.

A breaktrough to the dhamma is also mentioned in SN22.90 and SN46.56. According Bodhi this also refers to realising Sotapanna stage (SNII, note 76 and note 116).

-3. Breaktrough to the four noble truths.

To give an example from SN56.3 (SN, Bodhi)

…”Whatever clansmen in the future will rightly go forth from the household life into homelessness, all will do so in order to make the breakthrough to the Four Noble Truths as they really are. Whatever clansmen at present have rightly gone forth from the household life into homelessness, all have done so in order to make the breakthrough to the Four Noble Truths as they really are”…

This breaktrough is mentioned in SN56.3+4, SN56.26//32/34/35/37/44/51/60.

This breaktrough is very difficult to realise. It is compared to splitting a hair in 7 pieces by an arrow (SN56.45)!

Does this still refer to Sotapanna or maybe to arhantstage?

kind regards,
Siebe

[sybe07]

Thanks Lal.

I have understood that bhava can (also) refer to a specific state of mind in this live (point 2 in your post). It seems like bhavanga can also refer to a temporary specific state of mind, like being depressed or sad. It is not really clear to me what is the difference between those two.

Siebe

[sybe07]

I do not have any knowledge of Pali but i belief the statement ‘what is impermanent…is suffering’ is probably only introduced as a very condensed formula within a more bigger picture/teaching in which people allready know that anything that is impermanent is also conditioned, dependently arisen, subject to destruction, to vanishing, to fading away, to cessation and therefor cannot provide lasting happiness and cannot function as a refuge.
Clinging to such impermanent things is unskillful, suffering.

Nice feelings, for example, come with a certain happiness but when they vanish also with a certain unhappiness because they are gone and one wants them to be there again. So even when states are nice, even jhana, their nature of impermanance comes also with suffering as long as there is longing and irrealistic expactations of conditioned states.

Therefor the very condensed formula…what is impermanent is suffering, can be useful and truthful too, but one must see it in the context, like anything.

I think Lal’s explanation of anicca, dukkha and anatta will lead to the same mindset, but i belief that it will probably take less time when anicca is translated as ‘one cannot maintain anything like one wishes’.

My (small) objection to this translation is that this is very close, or almost the same, as what dukkha also means.

But, in the end, i feel, the expressed message is the same.
Siebe

[sybe07]

Dear C. Saket,

Thanks for your kind words. I hope we all realise sotapanna, me en you too.

I am also very glad i have found Lal’s website. Lal emphazises very much the unfruitfullness of samsara and seeing the total picture. I am grateful that i am getting a glimps.

Sakkaya ditthi
For me the teachings on sakkaya ditthi are meant to express the fact that (since beginningless time) mind has become very familiar with the sense of a body, feelings, perceptions, mental formations and consciousnesses. It has become so familiar with those experiences that it regards those instinctively as ‘mine’ and as ‘this i am’. One does not do this ‘self’. It arises conditionally.

It is like mind wears five kinds/layers of clothing and has never seen her own nakedness and thinks ‘ i am those five kinds of clothing’ or ‘i am not without those five kind of clothing’.

Anyway, mind has become very intimately related to what it experiences and this has the form of views (‘i am what i experience’ or ‘those experiences are mine’). I belief, those views are called sakkaya ditthi’s and at the moment i have no problem to call them identity-views.

My mind was once so focussed that i lost the sense of a body. When i became aware of this, fear arose. I instinctively touched things, a sense of embodiment came back. Why did fear arise? I belief, because of a sakkaya ditthi. Because of the view ‘i am the experienced body’. So when one looses this experience of a body one becomes afraid. This is the netto-result of identification which is a form of viewing, a sakkaya ditthi.

Maybe this looks very theoretical for some people but for me it isn’t.

Sakkaya ditthi’s are a real obstacle for deeply relaxing the mind and body, letting go, for stress-release, for ending fear, ending panic. The neurotic mind, like mine, has strong sakkaya ditthi’s.

Siebe

[sybe07]

Dear C. Saket,

-“he regards material form as self, or self as possessed of material form, or material form as in self, or self as in material form” (MN44§7)…
(so also for the other khandha’s)

Please tell me, what is really the problem with calling these 20 views identity or personality-views?

When one graps at the body as ‘mine’ there arises at that moment that identity view. So it works.

SN22.155

Idenfity View
“At Savatthi. “Bhikkhus, when what exists, clinging to what,
by adhering to what, does identity view arise?
“Venerable sir, our teachings are rooted in the Blessed One.. . .”
“When there is form, bhikkhus, by clinging to form, by adhering
to form, identity view arises. When there is feeling … perception
. . . volitional formations . . . consciousness, by clinging to consciousness,
by adhering to consciousness, identity view arises.”. . .
…

Siebe

[sybe07]

It would be great if anyone could translate Patisambhidamagga, Treatise on Insight, §9 (Nanamoli) from Pali to English because i belief there are those three contemplations explained, and then we can see what falls under anicca, dukkha and anatta. I belief it is like this:

Contemplation of dukkha

as painful is contemplation of dukkha
as disease is contemplation of dukkha
as a boil is contemplation of dukkha
as a dart is is contemplation of dukkha
as a calamity is contemplation of dukkha
as an affliction is contemplation of dukkha
is contemplation of dukkha
as a plague is contemplation of dukkha
as a disaster is contemplation of dukkha
as a terror is contemplation of dukkha
as a menace is contemplation of dukkha
as no protection is contemplation of dukkha
as no shelter is contemplation of dukkha
as no refuge is contemplation of dukkha
as a danger is contemplation of dukkha
as the root of calamity is contemplation of dukkha
as murderous is contemplation of dukkha
as subject to cankers is contemplation of dukkha
as Mara’s materialistic bait is contemplation of dukkha
as connected with the idea of birth is contemplation of dukkha
as connected with the idea of aging is contemplation of dukkha
as connected with the idea of ailment is contemplation of dukkha
as connected with the idea of sorrow is contemplation of dukkha
as connected with the idea of lamentation is contemplation of dukkha
as connected tot he idea of despair is contemplation of dukkha
as connected with the idea of defilement is contemplation of dukkha

So, in the above you can see that contemplating the khandha’s as no refuge, no protection, no shelter is not anatta contemplation but dukkha.

Contemplation of anicca

As impermanent is contemplation of anicca
As disintegrating is contemplation of anicca
As fickle is contemplation of anicca
As perishable is contemplation of anicca
As unenduring is contemplation of anicca
As subject to change is contemplation of anicca
As having no core is is contemplation of anicca
As due to be annihilated is contemplation of anicca
As formed is contemplation of anicca
As connected with the idea of death is contemplation of anicca

In the above you see that all kind of synonims are use for impermanence, like perishable, enunduring, subject to change etc. So this seems to refer to anicca nupassana.

Contemplation of anatta (=sunnatanupassana)

As alien is contemplation of anatta
As empty is contemplation of anatta
As void is contemplation of anatta
As not-self is contemplation of anatta

But maybe this is completely misunderstood by me or maybe completely wrong translated from the Pali.

Siebe

[sybe07]

Hi Lal,

MN44 §7 is about how sakkaya ditthi is establised and §8 how it is not established. Maybe you have translated §8?

I think i agree with your explanation in which you emphasize there is a huge difference between seeing the body as not mine and really experiencing the body as not mine etc. I belief this is indeed also the topic of SN22.89.
https://suttacentral.net/en/sn22.89

The monk Khemaka who is in great pain, sick, afflicted does not regard anything among these five aggregates subject to clinging as self or as belonging to self (no sakkaya ditthi) but he has still a notion “I am” in relation to these five aggregates subject to clinging.

In short, apparantly Khemaka does not see the pain he feels as ‘who he is’ (full identification with the pain), nor as his-pain (mine-making) but he also is not completely detached from that pain. This is because in him there still lingers a derire, underlying tendency and conceit “I am” in regard to that painful feeling. He is not an arahant yet.

Therefor i belief, it is correct what you see, indeed, yes i belief you are right. Although Khemaka does not regard/see the pain as his pain he still experiences it as his pain or as pain he has to bear, because of that remaining “I am” desire, underlying tendency and conceit.

So, indeed, i think this sutta’s want to express there is indeed a huge difference between ending sakkaya ditthi and really experience in a detached manner.

This makes sense for me. Thanks al lot Lal!

Siebe

[Author]

Posts