Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
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.
Lal: Our attachments to this world are triggered by sensory inputs. That is why the Loka sutta says it is the origin of the world. Once one understands how such attachments are triggered by “distorted sanna” it will be easier to avoid such attachments.
I understand that without distorted sanna there will be no attachment. However this does not mean that Bahiya understood the concept of attachment in the first place. He could have just “fixed” his distorted sanna without knowing that it removes the attachment which causes suffering!
Lal: Explanation of the deep meanings embedded in those verses requires many. many posts. Rebirth, suffering, 4 noble truths, paticca samuppada, kamma, tilakkhana, are all embedded in those verses.
From here do you imply that Bahiya was able to comprehend the basic rules of kamma, that suffering arises from ignorance, the paticca samuppada process just from these 4 lines? It seems highly impossible for me. I agree that one can link all the above concepts to the 4 lines, but to be able to know the existence of the concepts, let alone understand them seems not possible.
My interpretation is still that he was able to see the world as it is, and that could be bare minimum for enlightenment. There are many ways to explain the same truth, we may only need to see the truth through one aspect (in this case about distorted sanna), than needing to learn all other aspects. Perhaps, Lal, I could learn more from your upcoming posts if you do elaborate how every other important concepts are embedded in the lines and how Bahiya could have derived them.
Jittananto: The power of the Paramis and Kusulas of the past is demonstrated by Arahant Bahiya, who was a bhikkhu during the time of Lord Buddha Kassapa.
Could you point to me where you’ve learnt this? Thank you!
Yash: “Firstly, Everything in this universe is a manifestation of energy, the cars, the trees, the food, etc. all have atoms as the fundamental structure according to science. If we go deep,we get up to the quark level. In Buddha Dhamma it’s the Suddhataka.“
Yes! With this we can understand that everything is a product of cause and effect at that moment.Eg every second a fire burns is a product of some oxygen, an ignition and fuel. Meaning every second is a new manifestation! Because the causes are used up every second – eg i have to replenish the fuel every second. That can be said for everything in this world, even for inanimate objects. Eg every second a gold bar exist, it is because of the causes that the gold bar is at that temperature, the electromagnetic energies present within the gold bar. This also applies to people as well. This is how we can be “unshakeable” with the passing on of parents, because instead of seeing them as fixed entities, we have to see them as a product of cause and effect at every single moment. Their passing is simply due to the changes in conditions. From this we can see the anicca nature, that whatever fixed entities we think we like are actually just products of causes at that moment and they continue to be subjected to cause and effect.
Yash: “The bottom line is, you don’t even need to include time for Anicca. Even if someone earns a lot by selling drugs and is Enjoying sensuality, Anicca is there even at that moment.”
Yes! I thought that looking that things are of Anicca nature at that moment, without caring if it will last or not, can give you new insights. For example, even if something can last forever, and hypothetically if i can live forever to enjoy it and there is no rebirth, and hypothetically there are no kammic consequences for desiring it, one should still not desire it (anicca as undesirable). This is because of the understanding that the craving is mind made, the object actually does not bring happiness at all.
I have been thinking about how Bahiya gained enlightenment after one verse:
“Ditte Ditta Mattañ Bhavissathi ,
Suthe Sutha Mattañ Bhavissathi,
Mute Muta Mattañ Bhavissathi,
Viññāte Viññāta mattañ Bhavissathi”
“Where there is seeing, there is only the seeing
Where there is hearing, there is only the hearing,
Where there is feeling, there is only the feeling,
Where there is cognizing, there is only the cognizing.”
Here, there is no mention of rebirth, suffering, 4 noble truths, paticca samuppada, kamma, tilakkhana, and no mention that things are subject to changes. Which made me think that all these are not required at the bare minimum, one just has to understand that there is nothing more to the sense we perceive, and not create any more “mind made thoughts”. Of course, understanding of all the other things in the Buddha’s world view can help achieve this, but at the core essence it may not be required. Again I could be wrong, Bahiya could have gained this understanding somehow even before meeting the Buddha, perhaps in his past lives, but he does not have to remember it/ think about it to be enlightened.
1 user thanked author for this post.
Lal: Thus, the kammic energy a human gandhabba acquires at the moment of its inception is enough to (i) sustain that gandhabba for many thousands of years and (ii) maintain interactions with the brain while inside a physical human body.
Then can we interpret that the “energy” required for a kammically neutral action, is just from a kamma vipaka?So perceiving sights, or generating a thought to tell the brain to move a finger?
In the end, our actions are all just due to either kamma vipaka or kamma generating
Thank you everyone. Perhaps Thero came up with this way of explanation to reach out to an audience with less exposure to the dhamma. However, with better understanding of the concepts, we should ultimately focus on interpreting from the tipitaka itself, eg anicca dukkha anatta, 4 noble truths.
Then, what energy is the energy which the mind tells the brain to move the hand? Surely there must be an energy for the mind to signal the brain to do something, or the brain to signal the mind sights, smells etc. I’m talking about actions with no kammic consequences, eg lifting a finger
On the topic of energy, I was thinking of how kammic energy can be converted to other forms of energy and vice versa. it seems possible in the following analysis:
The eye converts light energy to electrical energy (to go through nerves). The brain, acts as a transmitter, to convert electrical energy to “mind energy”, for us to be able to perceive the senses. The reverse is true (mind energy > electrical energy > kinetic energy to move the hand). I am quoting this example from one of Amandassana Thero’s sermons.
In this sense, would it be possible for our minds/ kammic energies to arise from other forms of energy, eg heat energy, which somehow became “defiled”? And after parinibbana, this energy reverts back to other normal forms of energy? I’m also thinking in terms of the law of conservation of energy, where in every closed system, the sum of energies must be kept constant. in this case after parinibbana, this mind energy should end up somewhere, right?
1 user thanked author for this post.
Hi Lal, i haven’t had any physical/ verbal abuse that I can recall in detail. But you’re right in saying that if we have more details in the situation, eg how it arises, what the person thinks, why their thoughts arise this way, it will be much easier to answer!
And it also becomes easier to break down to 1) what a normal person would do, 2) what a sotapanna would do, 3) what an arahant would do to facilitate understanding.
What if someone looks away from their abuser because it gives them bad memories? Is that abhisankhara still?
In this case, it is not done out of greed/ hate, but i’m not sure about the ignorance part.
Another angle to look at is fear. Fear that they will be hit again. What can we classify this under?
Thank you, i had the belief that the Nibbana can be extrapolated from niramisa sukha.
I guess it is like someone explaining colours to a blind person. The blind person can only very very minutely grasp what colours are, eg “imagine a colour when you’re angry, that is red”. But the blind person can never comprehend the concept of colours fully.
Thank you for your respones
Y Not: “The first is suffering, the second relief and the third happiness. Here, recovery from pain is not the happiness, but is essential for happiness to follow. There can be no happiness where there is pain. ”
Actually this brings up another query i have, which is “is there happiness in Nibbāna?” I have felt the cooling down, eg less agitated, less stress when unfortunate circumstances happen, less vexed with less desires, but i don’t feel “happier”, just “less unhappy”.
To give a crude elaboration, let’s say a normal person’s happiness is at -20 because there is a lot of suffering, it will work towards 0 with less suffering, that’s what i’m feeling now. “happiness” implies that it can go from 0 to a positive number, eg 10, 20. I have heard this word used by several monks, “finding true happiness”. Is it true that there is more after “absence of suffering?”
