Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
taryal:It is true that one’s gati can influence these conscious sankharas (and perhaps does to an untrained mind) but they are not necessarily deterministic and a human can use them to significantly change their gati.
Yes, but what causes the human to want to change their gati in the first place? Is it out of no where? There has to be a cause. Here i argue that the reason why someone wants to change their gati in the first place is because of their previous gati/ 5 aggregates, which is caused by their previous 5 aggregates so on and so forth. There is no room for a doer! It is because there are causes. It is because their very own gati that encourages them to change their gati. Even to stop maladaptive dreaming, you have to change your habits, but what causes you to change your habits in the first place? Other habits before that/ external influences.
taryal: But humans do have the ability to change their destiny.
In the conventional sense yes, we can “choose” whether we want to walk across the street blindfolded or not, we can choose who we want to associate with, but i’m saying in the sense of the absolute truth, at the citta level, the reason why we do all this is nothing more than the outcome of the 5 aggregates and the outcome of the causes at the moment, it is not caused by our additional “free will”.
Since the dhamma is about cause and effect, I would think that if all the causes are known, all the effects are known. There is no room for “own decision making”, because what we do are based on the causes. And that’s why the absolute truth is that there is “no doer”, “no me”, but we have the distorted perception that there is, until we reach the Arahant stage.
Here I would like to make the case that for the story of Ven. Sariputra predicting the outcome of the war, if the Buddha had seen into the 5 aggregates of every soldier in the battlefield, if he could see the kings, generals, worms and birds on the battlefield, and even the butterfly that would flap its wings across the world that may shift the wind, everyone else in the 31 realms present, basically every single thing that influences the war, he would not only be able to predict who wins, but also the number of casualties, the total number of stabs, down to the citta level who dies when. This is because he is fully aware of the causes, hence he will be fully aware of the effects.
I am taking inspiration from Laplace’s Demon, “if someone (the demon) knows the precise locationand momentum of every atom in the universe, their past and future values for any given time are entailed; they can be calculated from the laws of classical mechanics.” Here, instead of just classical mechanics, if Laplace’s demon knows the full knowledge of the world, the laws of kamma and the 5 aggregates, he can derive the past, present and future citta of everyone.
This is what I mean by determinism, everything is determined by the causes, there is no room for an extra “agent” to change the causes, because the agent himself is a product of cause and effect.
I think this is worthwhile contemplating because it would help us remove our perception of self too, if we see that whatever we do is due to the pre-existing causes and not a “doer”
2 users thanked author for this post.
Yes, well said, Jittananto, Lal and Christian.
1 user thanked author for this post.
Yes, of course one should be able to control oneself in these discussions to prevent it from being heated, and it is wrong to impose onto others, it will be unproductive. However we can always try our luck and see if they are interested. And it doesn’t mean that when you try to introduce the dhamma to other people, you stop progressing on the path. It’s not like teaching the dhamma becomes a “full time job”, one can try to teach it when the opportunity arises, but yes it should not be the main goal. Also, one of the ways of meditation is to teach others! (Vimuttāyatanasutta) This is in line with the Feynman technique where the best way to learn something is to teach it. So far there has not been heated discussions for me, for example one can approach the topic even without rebirth and kamma initially. We do not even need to say that this is “buddhist philosophy” and not include pali words for a start! It is only after they are curious to learn more that you can explain in detail.
Christian: “People who are ignoring Dhamma or not are willing to learn it or practice it, or they are not interested, etc. are not children who are about to eat glass, if you think this way you will pretty much suffer as there is no way to changing the people or the world”
Perhaps my analogy of the glass shard is not good. Let’s say you found out that smoking is harmful, and most people don’t know it. You see that your friend smokes. Would you try to explain to him that it is harmful? If he still doesn’t believe it after some explanation then sure, we can leave it as it is. But at the same time, will you suffer because millions of people in the world smoke? Similarly when your friend has many desires, you can drop the hint “hey, have you ever thought that having desire is the problem?”
At least, the dhamma can be explained. This is where you know your lack of understanding. When explaining to my friends, there are questions which i found hard to answer, which led me to realize the gaps in my understanding.
Christian: “If one reach Anagami or Arahanat then may do “convincing” but at that stage I doubt anyone will see point of doing so”
We can do so out of compassion. If you see a child about to eat a glass shard will you just stand there? And why did the Buddha travel to teach Angulimāla? Of course they tried to preach to those who can understand. For those who cannot, it may be counter intuitive because it will make them dislike the dhamma more. Therefore we have to realise when to stop. But you’re right that we do need some good foundation ourselves.
I would also agree with Lal that just a sotapanna stage is enough. Even if we do not have the complete understanding ourselves, we can still pique their interest and point them to the necessary sites for them to gain a deeper understanding.
I agree that it is kamma generating, but i’m not sure if it is “immoral”. I thought immoral would mean that it would “hurt others”. In this case it would be a more extreme extent of paying for a massage from someone else, but isit morally wrong? Does this mean that paying for sex has a greater kammic impact than taking drugs? In both cases they trap one to the kamma loka and they are one of the more extreme sense pleasures, but im not sure if we can count both as “immoral”. Also, how does marriage “magically” make the act of sex go from immoral to moral? I would think that the laws of kamma would go beyond the conventional terms set up by people. I am saying all this with the scenario that the person is not married/ has a relationship with anyone. Also, was it not normal to have concubines during the buddha’s time? At most they would be regarded as “excessive” sense pleasures, not sure if the tipitaka says anything about concubines being immoral.
Lal: Again, the “pleasure of sex” is “mind-made, even though hard to believe.
Is the sukha vedana not real? because it is felt by the body. I am referencing this to “Only sensory inputs to the “physical body” can bring sukha or dukkha vedanā directly. ” Vedanā (Feelings) Arise in Two Ways
Hi Yash, I have tried to make that point a few times. However, people will see their happiness as a sine curve, where y axis is happiness and x axis is time. On the other hand, they will see the buddhist ones as a flat zero across time. Actually this I cannot refute so strongly. We will no longer be able to feel the happiness of a gold medal as much as olympic winners do, as you said, there is no longer/ not much vexation. Even when they understand that the pleasure is actually mind made and the release of vexation, pleasure is still pleasure, so what if it is mind made? And also with the Usain Bolt example, if people could, they would just find the next peak of the sine wave. To them, it would be better than experiencing a flat 0. “Nothing worth having comes easy” is the mentality that we all have.
The only point I can make is that the sine curve has more downs than ups for lay people, and perhaps buddhists will not be at flat 0 but progressively go higher with feelings of “well being”. Even this may be hard to get across, they would think it is a “placebo effect”. Another possible way of explaining is that buddhist can experience the highs without the lows. But I think that is not possible, to feel that much of pleasure you must have that much of vexation.
:max_bytes(150000):strip_icc()/dotdash_Final_Sine_Wave_Feb_2020-01-b1a62c4514c34f578c5875f4d65c15af.jpg)
2 users thanked author for this post.
Hi Taryal
During Metta Bhavana, you can look at things the other way. You can see how people are trapped in this suffering due to their ignorance. You can contemplate the suffering they endure because of their ignorance. From here you can then you would sincerely want all beings to be free from suffering, because there is so much to endure. Think about it, if all beings are already Arahants/ sotapannas then there is no need to wish them to be free from suffering! Ultimately, Metta Bhavana is about the intention.
7. What matters is not the particular set of words used, but what is felt in one’s heart. In order to do that one needs to truly comprehend that there is REAL SUFFERING in this world, not only at the human or animal realms but in many other realms. (5. Ariya Metta Bhāvana (Loving Kindness Meditation)
Again, what’s important is to understand that an infinite number of beings are going through suffering, and you wish they can be rid of it. Just like how you can generate compassion from seeing a starving child, the same can be done with Metta Bhavana.
1 user thanked author for this post.
Hi Lal, thank you for sharing. Actually the context behind this question was that I am inspired by how monks in the Jethavanarana Buddhist Monastery were able to explain dhamma concepts to lay people without invoking much of kamma and rebirth, yet they can provide such convincing explanations for the lay person about how the puthujjana way of living is highly flawed. (By the way for those who have been trying to teach dhamma to their friends, i highly recommend their videos, they explain with simple logic which people are more willing to accept)
From here I thought that most problems can be solved without invoking the “wider worldview”. Of course to gain complete understanding, one must also ultimately learn the Noble Truths, Tilakkhana, Paticca Samuppāda.
You also remind me of the reflections from the conversation I had, and watching the sermons is that explaining dhamma concepts to a lay person with just “lay logic” would be a good way to comprehend the dhamma. That way you can be fully convinced yourself by explaining things with just logic.
However, my other reflection is that if we continue to do this, it may make us stray from the path because ultimately paticca samuppada cannot be understood with “lay logic”, and we won’t contemplate this wider worldview which is necessary for Nibbāna. For example, the second noble truth requires the understanding that attachment leads to birth, with does not follow “lay logic”
1 user thanked author for this post.
Thank you Jittananto. It is heartwarming to know that one is not truly helpless even after an apayagami by understanding the dhamma, even though it may take a long time for the effects to bear fruit!
1 user thanked author for this post.
Thank you Lal for pointing me to the links. I was mistaken that suttas reflect the word for word utterances of the Buddha. They need to be explained because the Buddha probably spoke a lot more than what is relayed in the sutta. Likewise for Bahiya, a lot more probably went on than what is reflected in the suttas.
Yash: That Yogi ,even though has seen the dangers of apayagami actions, doesn’t know the method to Permanently eradicate such desires. He is just afraid. He has seen sensuality is tormenting, but doesn’t know how to Permanently stop it’s cravings. That Yogi himself has seen all this by Suppressing Kama Raga! How would he ever realise to eradicate it permanently?
Wow this is a wonderful point! You remind me that although they may somewhat grasp the ideas of suffering and the first noble truth, they are missing the second, third and fourth truths. Then there is still ignorance, ignorance that attachment leads to suffering.
Jittanato: Second, we do not know what results and paramis these yogis develop. Some of them may be bodhisattas, paccekabodhisattas, or future arahants.
Yes this also makes sense, perhaps developing wisdom on anicca dukkha anatta can help them in the path in the future, though it may not start them on the eightfold path initially. And thank you for sending the links on Pacceka Buddhas as well.
1 user thanked author for this post.
In Bāhiya Dārucīriya Mahāthera, what is mentioned is as follows:
(1) “That being so, Bāhiya, you should train yourself thus: in seeing visible objects (any visible object), be aware of the seeing as just seeing; in hearing sounds, be aware of the hearing as just hearing; likewise in experiencing odours, tastes and tangible objects be aware of the experiencing of smelling, tasting, and touching, as just smelling, tasting and touching respectively; and in cognizant mind objects, i.e. thoughts and ideas, be aware of just as cognizant.
(2) “Bāhiya, if you are able to remain aware of the seeing, the hearing, the experiencing, and the cognition of the (four categories of) sense objects, you will then be one who is not associated with attachment, hatred or bewilderment on account of the visible object that is seen, the sound that is heard, the palpable object that is experienced, or the mind-object that is cognized. In other words, certainly you will not be one who is attached, who hates, or who is bewildered.
(3) “Bāhiya, if on account of the visible object that is seen, the sound that is heard, the palpable object that is experienced, the mind-object that is cognized, you should have become not associated with attachment, hatred or bewilderment, i.e. if you should indeed have become not one who has attachment, who hates, or who is bewildered, then Bahiya, you will indeed become one who is not subject to craving, conceit or wrong view on account of the sense object that is seen, heard, experienced, or cognized. You will then have no thought of ‘This is mine’ (due to craving), no concept of ‘I’ (due to conceit), or no lingering idea or concept of ‘my self’ (due to wrong view).
(4) “Bāhiya, if you should indeed become one not subjected to craving, conceit or wrong view on account of the visible object that is seen, the sound that is heard, the palpable object that is experienced, the mind-object that is cognized, then Bahiya, (due to the absence of craving, conceit and wrong view in you) you will no more be reborn here in the human world, nor will you be reborn in the four remaining destinations (i.e. deva-world, the niraya world, the world of animals and the world of hungry spirits or petas). Apart from the present existence (of the human world) and the four remaining destinations, there is no other destination for you. The non-arising of fresh mind-andmatter virtually is the end of the defilements that are dukkha and the resultant round of existences that is dukkha.”
Is this what the Buddha actually said? Because in sutta central I see only the following:
“In that case, Bāhiya, you should train like this: ‘In the seen will be merely the seen; in the heard will be merely the heard; in the thought will be merely the thought; in the known will be merely the known.’ That’s how you should train. When you have trained in this way, you won’t be ‘by that’. When you’re not ‘by that’, you won’t be ‘in that’. When you’re not ‘in that’, you won’t be in this world or the world beyond or between the two. Just this is the end of suffering.”
What were the Buddha’s actual words? Is the sutta central one just a condensed one, or does the link Jittanato sent have additional commentaries, with words not from the Buddha himself? If what Buddha said is only from what is written in Sutta Central, then I am still confused how one can derive an understanding of rebirth, paticca samuppada, kamma from those words alone in Sutta Central.Thank you. In the second link, the story seems much longer than the sutta that i read initially from sutta central, which only had 4 lines from the buddha but now it seems like the buddha spoke a lot more to Bahiya. How is this the case? Where can i find “longer” versions of suttas next time?
Hmm actually i’m trying to get to a deeper point here. “Becoming a sotapanna” is just a rhetorical question to show how absurd it is for a yogi to become a sotapanna just like that. But what i’m trying to get at is that the contemplation of anicca, dukkha and anatta does not seem to be enough since yogis who can see past lives can already come to such conclusions.
Lal: Of course, your description of anariya yogis being able to see ALL types of past lives in incorrect. They cannot see their past lives in the apayas.
Does this mean if they can see lives in apayas then they are on the path without listening a word from the buddha/ noble associates? Of course not. Then, there is still something that they would still be missing. Perhaps it could be sakkaya ditthi as taryal mentioned. However, what i’m trying to show here is that anicca dukkha anatta is not enough, or i am missing something in my explanations of anicca dukkha anatta.
