[Tobias G]

Lal, can you please translate those lines in Pe 5 Hāravibhaṅgapañcamabhūmi?

Tattha tīṇi saṅkhatalakkhaṇāni tisso dukkhatā uppādo saṅkhatalakkhaṇaṁ, saṅkhāradukkhatāya dukkhatā ca saṅkhatalakkhaṇaṁ, vipariṇāmadukkhatāya dukkhatāti aññathattaṁ ca saṅkhatalakkhaṇaṁ, dukkhadukkhatāya ca dukkhatā

This is about the three sankhata lakkhana and the correlation to the three types of dukkha. I cannot see how dukkha-dukkha is linked to vaya lakkhana.

[Tobias G]

It is very clear to me, that an external input triggers vipaka vinnana.
“Cakkhuñca paṭicca rūpe ca uppajjāti cakkhuviññāṇaṃ.”

Dukkhasamudayasutta (SN 35.106) says:
“…Cakkhuñca paṭicca rūpe ca uppajjati cakkhuviññāṇaṁ. Tiṇṇaṁ saṅgati phasso.
Phassapaccayā vedanā; …”

When vipaka vinnana is established “tiṇṇaṁ saṅgati phasso” happens. Only then “phassapaccayā vedanā” follows. How does “tiṇṇaṁ saṅgati phasso” happen? Samphassa is “contact with defiled gati”. Thus mind incorporates san/gati into the cittas with the help of manasikara/cetana cetasika. That requires suitable namarupa. I don’t understand why salayatana can be bypassed in this case. Is this not PS?

You said:
“A key point is that cuti-patisandhi takes place in a citta vithi that starts with an arammana coming to mind. Thus the starting point in PS is “vedana paccaya tanha.”

That seems not right. There is at least (sam)phassa-ja-vedana before vedana-ja-tanha.

[Tobias G]

Is there a description in Abhidhamma pitaka or in any commentary for this maranasanna citta vithi?

[Tobias G]

Please also look at Vb6:

Tattha katamaṁ nāmarūpapaccayā saḷāyatanaṁ? Cakkhāyatanaṁ, sotāyatanaṁ, ghānāyatanaṁ, jivhāyatanaṁ, kāyāyatanaṁ, manāyatanaṁ — idaṁ vuccati “nāmarūpapaccayā saḷāyatanaṁ”.

Tattha katamo saḷāyatanapaccayā phasso? Cakkhusamphasso sotasamphasso ghānasamphasso jivhāsamphasso kāyasamphasso manosamphasso—ayaṁ vuccati “saḷāyatanapaccayā phasso”.

Tattha katamā phassapaccayā vedanā? Cakkhusamphassajā vedanā, sotasamphassajā vedanā, ghānasamphassajā vedanā, jivhāsamphassajā vedanā, kāyasamphassajā vedanā, manosamphassajā vedanā—ayaṁ vuccati “phassapaccayā vedanā”.

—————-
San gets incorporated with namarupa-ja-salayatana, salayatana-ja-phasso. “Tiṇṇaṃ saṅgati phasso” is samphassa.

[Tobias G]

I see that I should have questioned this long before. I was reading again the post
Dukkha Samudaya Starts With Samphassa-Jā-Vedanā. It is clear that vipaka vinnana will happen first, when the nimitta appears in a door-freed-process. But the mind will analyse the object/nimitta and therefore contacts the pancakkhandha via manasikara cetasika. Thus I think the start is “nāmarūpa paccayā salāyatana” where the mind adjusts the mindset in regard to gati/experience/memory.

What is purpose of the steps “nāmarūpa paccayā salāyatana, salāyatana paccayā (san)phassō”, if the PS starts at “vedana paccaya tanha”? I think the purpose of namarupa is to bring in “the way I like to see the world”, therefore salayatana are triggered and sanphassa can happen.

[Tobias G]

Do arupavacara Brahma have bhava dasaka + vatthu dasaka?
I guess as they do not have kaya dasaka they also do not have utuja kaya, right?

[Tobias G]

Maybe arupa means “not formed” or “not tangible”, because of bhuta stage.
It would be strange that the Buddha used the word arupa if it is misleading.

[Tobias G]

Agreed, I see your way of explanation. It is better to see the “danger of suffering” in sankhara dukkha.

[Tobias G]

Dukkha is “actual suffering” (physical pain and mental suffering) and the “danger of suffering” in the future (dukkhaṁ bhayaṭṭhena).

[Tobias G]

Finally all dukkha is based on previous sankhara and therefore all dukkha would be sankhara dukkha.

[Tobias G]

(Abhi)sankhara are the cause for all dukkha, because the sankata that a beings creates via abhisankhara will bring only suffering (in the long run). That is sankhara dukkha.

The question remains, why those two extra categories of dukkha (dukkha dukkha, viparinama dukkha)? Is it because not all vipaka is based on (abhi)sankhara of that certain being but based on conditons in this world? The world is made by sankhara/sankata of uncountable beings, thus a single being will experience bad vipaka based on the result of all sankhara (which we call “planet earth”).

[Tobias G]

Lal, you say:
One type of dukkha-dukkha (physical suffering) is vipaka.
– The other type of mental suffering, “domanassa vedana,” may arise due to the above vipaka vedana. That is absent in an Arahant, even though the first would still be there.

——————-

If sankhara dukkha arise later as vipaka, then those will be dukkha dukkha, right? Same for viparinama dukkha; it comes in as vipaka vinnana and would generate domanassa vedana. That means all would be dukkha dukkha. How to distinguish?

[Tobias G]

As you said there is mental and physical suffering.
How do I feel saṅkhāra dukkha, both ways? Is saṅkhāra-dukkha the mental stress e.g. when maintaining the body?
Is dukkha-dukkha also both types, I feel physical pain and suffer also mentally about my sickness?
But dukkha-dukkha can also be stress via vipaka.
I have trouble distinguishing that.

[Tobias G]

Thus this “chemical base” + gandhabba (patisandhi vinnana) is the “origin of life” with a dense body. It is only that modern science does not know the gandhabba is required, right?

You did not answer this:
What is spontaneous reproduction of “certain humans” and “certain beings in the lower realms”?

[Tobias G]

That is what Lal translates in the post Kukkuravatika Sutta (Majjhima Nikāya 57) – Kammakkhaya:

#12: Neither Dark nor Bright Kamma

“And what, Puṇṇa, is an action that is neither dark nor bright with the neither-dark-nor-bright result, action that leads to the destruction of defilements (and asava/anusaya)? Such volitions (cetana) abandon actions that are dark or bright with dark-or-bright results. Such an action (kamma) is neither dark nor bright with a neither-dark-nor-bright result. Therefore, such actions lead to the destruction of defilements (and asava/anusaya). They do not lead to rebirth in any realm.)”

[Author]

Posts