Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
I wonder what is fear in relation to kilesa? Is fear a kilesa or upakilesa? Is it part of dosa or moha? Is it part of panca nivarana (e.g. thina middha or uddacca-kukkucca)?
Plants are alive but not sentient. They do not have a mind. There are people who lovingly or evilly speak to cooked rice. The rice reacts with a certain consistency or just rottenness. How can this be explained in terms of Buddha Dhamma?
Under #9 it is said: “…However, the first cells that appeared in the Earth were created by kammic energy (in javana cittas)…”
Also somewhere on this website Lal said that the evolution theory of Darwin is not correct (evolution through natural selection).
I do not understand how the first dinosaur or the first elephant or the first human appeared on earth. Can someone please explain?
Hi Upekkha,
maybe you can ask the “voice” what it wants, or you request the “voice” to leave. You could prepare this by taking a good meditation position, calm down and then start to talk with the being, also ask for forgiveness.With metta
Please see #9: “…Translated: ‘And what, bhikkhus, is the way leading to the cessation of identity? …”
Lal, you translate here “sakkāyanirodhagāminī paṭipadā” as “the way leading to the cessation of identity”. Does it mean that sakkaya means identity? Thus sakkaya ditthi is still identity view or me-view or self view?
As you say in #4: sakkāya is pañcupādānakkhandhā. Thus ditthi here is the wrong view that the five khandha are good and beneficial which is part of ditthi vipallasa.
That is clear, Lal. What I mean is this: #3 says that ALL wrong views are removed with removal of sakkaya ditthi. But this is not the case. The Sotapanna still has wrong views e.g. about kama raga. That is why the Sotapanna still enjoys watching a movie or having a big ice cream. In other words, the Sotapanna has established samma ditthi to a basic level but not to full extend. That means there are still ditthis but these are subtle forms.
In the same way you translate the sutta AN6.95 as: “A Sotapanna (or one with higher magga phala) accomplished in view (diṭṭhisampanno puggalo)…“, see #6. The term “accomplished in view” is used, which also means “perfect”. But a Sotapannas samma ditthi is not perfect but a basic level.
Link Nibbana exists
Post #11 says: “…But the fine body (trija kaya) of the gandhabba cannot “bear” the energy associated with an Arahant. In the same way, the fine bodies of a deva or a brahma also cannot….”
That means if a deva or a brahma attains Arahanthood it cannot live any longer and will immediately reach Parinibbana .
I wonder why those two words ‘anuloma’ and ‘patiloma’ mean forward/backward while in the post Sotapanna Anugami and a Sotapanna it is said:
#8 “…“anu” means “through the understanding of Tilakkhana”, “lo” means “craving for worldly things”, and “ma” means “removal”, and thus “anulōma” means “removal of craving for worldly things to some extent via the comprehension of Tilakkhana”.”
How to sort this?
A question comes up regarding this verse: “Tattha katame avijjā paccayā saṅkhārā? Puññābhisaṅkhāro, apuññābhisaṅkhāro, āneñjābhisaṅkhāro, kāyasaṅkhāro, vacīsaṅkhāro, cittasaṅkhāro”
You say that all these are abhisankhara. If so, then cittasankhara = manosankhara = abhisankhara?
#6 says:
“…If we then start moving body parts to respond, then those are initiated by kāya kammā…”It should be “…initiated by kaya sankhara”, right?
#7 says:
“7. Thus it is important to note that kāya sankhāra are also thoughts. They are responsible for body movements, i.e., kāya kammā….”Do those kaya sankhara trigger kaya vinnati rupa?
Mano sankhara alone are not abhisankhara, right? Mano sankhara can lead to abhisankhara via “more thinking” in form of vaci and kaya sankhara. Thus the kamma is not strong or complete with only mano sankhara. Mano sankhara are the initial reaction (sanna, vedana) on a sense input (also to a kamma nimitta in case of cuti-patisandhi). “More thinking” means more cetasika are involved, like dosa, moha, lobha …
#6 is still having the issue:
“…If done WITHOUT wrong vision, with pleasure, and without prompting will have the next highest strength. (the point is that the pleasure will be reduced, and one will be hesitant due to the knowledge that it is a bad act, thus reducing the javana power).
If done WITHOUT wrong vision, with pleasure, and with prompting will have the next highest strength.
If done WITHOUT wrong vision, with neutral feeling, and without prompting will have the next highest strength.
If done WITHOUT wrong vision, with neutral feeling, and with prompting will have the least strength….”Also the levels of akusala kamma are wrong (if my english understanding is good enough):
“…
If done with wrong vision, with pleasure, and without prompting will have the highest strength.
If done with wrong vision, with pleasure, and with prompting will have the next highest strength.
If done with wrong vision, with neutral feeling, and without prompting will have the next highest strength.
If done with wrong vision, with neutral feeling, and with prompting will have the next highest strength….”It should be “..next lower strength”, right?
With the rewritten post Kamma are Done with Sankhāra – Types of Sankhāra the start of this forum post in Feb 2018 was not correct: “…That means also kusala abhisankhara are done with the dasa akusala involved…”
It must be: “punna abhisankhara are done with the dasa akusala involved, except those where micca ditthi is removed”.Deeds become kusala when micca ditthi is removed and tilakkhana are grasped at least to some extent, that is where a person switches from the mundane 8fold path to the noble 8fold path.
Any thoughts?The Sutta says: “…there are twenty factors on the side of the wholesome, and twenty factors on the side of the unwholesome.”
Lal speaks about 10 outcomes of each path. What are the 10 results of each path and what are the 20 factors for each side? I do not get the information clear from the sutta as well as from Lals essay.
What I understand is that we have 10 micca ditthi + 10 akusala kamma on the side of the unwholesome. Are that the “factors”?
Dr. Chakma, your explanation how someone is doing the dishes in terms of Abhidhamma is very helpful. There I see the connection between the mind and e.g. moving the arms (via kaya vinnati). Maybe Lal could prepare a post with such examples of kusala, akusala, neutral activities and corresponding citta vithi.
