Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
OK, Arahants still generate manosankhara. But there is no akusala gati. Thus those manosankhara are not defiled with gati. As you say in the post Difference Between Tanhā and Upādāna, #4:
“Then manō saṅkhāra arise automatically according to gati. That will happen as long as we have taṇhā (either via kāma rāga or paṭigha; avijjā is present in both cases). We automatically get attracted.”
So tanha can arise if asobhana or sobhana cetasika are included in the cittas and paññā is absent.
Can we take tanha as mano sankhara based on gati and avijja? I see there is no cetasika called tanha. Therefore I guess it is sanna and vedana according to gati that is tanha.
If a person gets attached with avijja vaci sankhara follow as vitakka and vicāra.See post 31 realms – table:
#3
Dvihetuka means kusala kamma done with alobha, adosa.
Ahetuka means kusala kamma done with only alobha, adosa, but also without enthusiasm.Is that correct?
For me it seems “no mind” means “no hadaya”. But with dhammayatana there is mind (even if no thoughts are possible). The statement “only body, no mind” is confusing. The life must be maintained and that requires some “mind” or nama part.
Ok, understood.
We know bhavanga as a state of mind like being in an “angry mindset” for a certain time.On the other hand there is bhavanga as life continuum. In the post citta vithi you say that “bhavaṅga citta can arise only within a citta vithi”. What does it mean? What is the difference between bhavanga and bhavanga citta?
When looking at the pañcadvāra citta vīthi it is shown like this:
B B B B B “AB BC BU PD CV Sam San V J J J J J J J T T” BT BT BT BT…The “B B B …” is what? Is that just the mode of presentation for “bhavanga” and there is no real bhavanga citta?
Lal, will you change the description in the table?
asanna satta – “Body only; no mind”
The explanation for Arūpadhātu says this:
Arūpadhātuyā upapattikkhaṇe katamāni dve āyatanāni pātubhavanti? Manāyatanaṁ, dhammāyatanaṁ— arūpadhātuyā upapattikkhaṇe imāni dve āyatanāni pātubhavanti.
What is the difference between manāyatanaṁ and dhammāyatanaṁ?
Vb 18 states:
4.3. Asaññasatta
Asaññasattānaṁ devānaṁ upapattikkhaṇe kati khandhā pātubhavanti …pe… kati cittāni pātubhavanti?Asaññasattānaṁ devānaṁ upapattikkhaṇe eko khandho pātubhavati— rūpakkhandho; dve āyatanāni pātubhavanti— rūpāyatanaṁ, dhammāyatanaṁ; dve dhātuyo pātubhavanti— rūpadhātu, dhammadhātu; ekaṁ saccaṁ pātubhavati— dukkhasaccaṁ; ekindriyaṁ pātubhavati— rūpajīvitindriyaṁ. Asaññasattā devā ahetukā anāhārā aphassakā avedanakā asaññakā acetanakā acittakā pātubhavanti.
(I cannot add a link, the buttons are missing)
In the table 31 realms of existence is is mentioned that there is “no mind” for an asanna satta. What is right? Is there hadaya vatthu or not?
What means ekaja kaya?
5000 years is mostly mentioned and 2500 years as the remaining time of Buddha sasana.
Buddhism and Evolution – Aggañña Sutta (DN 27), #17 refers to 5000 years Buddha sasana.
In this post you said “No progress can be made outside the Buddha Sasana – It must be noted that the time limit for Buddha Sasana of 5000 years or so holds only in this “human world”.”.
Why are Tilakkhana not Included in 37 Factors of Enlightenment?, #2 refers to 5000 years.
The Origin of Matter – Suddhāṭṭhaka, #13…5000 years.
Lal, will you change the texts on this web site regarding the “2500 years”? Or will you write a new post?
What is the relation between attha purisa puggalā and purisa gati?
Is “purisa” just “male”?
“Puggala” is “a person”, right?Does it mean, only women with purisa gati can become sotapanna and higher?
Lal said: “However, there is at least one sutta that says as long as true Dhamma will not totally disappear and there will be people who will be able to attain Nibbana. I hope someone may remember the name of that sutta and post it.”
I found this: MIL 5.1.7
… “The good law will now, Ānanda, endure for five hundred years.” In so saying he was fixing a limit to religion. But when in speaking to Subhadda, and by way of proclaiming who were the true Samaṇas, he said: “But if, in this system, the brethren live the perfect life, then the world would not be bereft of Arahats“There is a longer explanation about those two statements.
