Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
Can rupa raga also mean that one has raga for dhammā? Like the “bearing” of jhana’s.
Or for an Anagami besides raga for the Buddha dhamma, also has raga for dhammā? Like the “bearing” / “experiencing” of the Buddha dhamma.
– “P.S. “Rupa raga” includes jhanic sukha, but is not restricted to that; “attachment to Dhamma” is also included in rupa raga”
Thank you !!! I was actually considering / thinking of that.
Could rupa raga also mean raga for niramisa sukha?
It’s taught that Anagami still has rupa raga and arupa rage, if someone didn’t cultivate jhana’s and they attained the anagami stage. Besides raga for jhanic states, are there other ways of understanding what rupa raga is or for an anagami besides raga for jhanic states, are there other rupa raga an anagami might have? I tried searching the site, but not able to find much information relating to anagami and rupa raga.
Okay, at a later time when you have a better idea about your work developments or what you have decided on let me know then.
I’m hoping others can also make the trip! and thank you Lal for the recommendation.
I brought this up because was hoping some of the forum members here might make a trip to Sri Lanka this year. I was already planning on to be flexible and open to the different dates of travel to Sri Lanka if that allows me to meet up with the other forum members. Personally I wanted go anytime after September and as soon as I can, so my date is not exactly set. If LDF, Jorg and his friend would like to meet up, I can arrange my schedule to / in Sri Lanka to meet up.
As well Jorg and LDF, if we do end up meeting in Sri Lanka and our planning / timing works out, you’re free to join me and possibly some Thero’s to the Jaya Sri Maha Bodhi and other sacred sites around the area. I heard it would take about 3 days to travel “comfortably” around the area to the other sacred sites. Comfortably meaning not rushing during the travel and having time to meditate around the sites or hoping to anyways. . .
Btw Jorg, how long do you plan to stay in Sri Lanka for? For me, it’ll be about 3 weeks.
For the past day or so I have been trying to figure out or see if there’s any difference in meaning between the words kāma & kāmā when used in the sutta’s. From reading and learning from the PD posts, I understand that kāma & kāmā would mean the same thing, the desiring and relishing of the 5 sense objects or kama assada, sankappa raga and so on.Taking that to the test on the sutta’s, I initially thought there might’ve been a different meaning assigned to kāmā in the sutta’s. Because in Pali dictionary or a search online, it would bring up a singular and plural definition.
1. (mostly in sg.) wish, desire, pleasure;
2. (in pl.) the objects of sensual pleasure viz. rūpa, sadda, gandha, rasa, phoṭṭhabba,I’ve taken kāmā the plural form meaning as the objects of sensual pleasures and applied it to some sutta’s, but don’t always end up with a consistent interpretation or explanation. While using the interpretation of the desiring and relishing of the 5 sense objects or kama assada for whenever the words kāma & kāmā is used showed more of a consistent interpretation / translation.What I have learned and realized for myself through investigating is that kāma & kāmā, the singular and plural meaning giving by dictionaries and by combining both together actually gives the definition / meaning for kāma & kāmā!And that is in singular form: wish, desire, pleasure for (in plural form) the objects of sensual pleasure viz. rūpa, sadda, gandha, rasa, phoṭṭhabba.Or the wishing, desiring, relishing (sankappa raga) for the 5 sense objects which is rūpa, sadda, gandha, rasa, phoṭṭhabba.But regardless of Pali grammar play, I believe I just came across a Pali source that states what “kāmā” is or I believe anyways. Basically it’s what’s been taught in some PD posts here, sankappa raga, kama raga and others.“Vivicceva kāmehi vivicca akusalehi dhammehī”ti tattha katame kāmā? Chando kāmo, rāgo kāmo, chandarāgo kāmo, saṅkappo kāmo, rāgo kāmo, saṅkapparāgo kāmo—ime vuccanti “kāmā”.Is kāmā the plural word of “kāma”?
I understand “kāma” to be sankappa raga, but not exactly sure what kāmā would exactly mean.
Do they mean the exact same thing or “kāmā” can also have different meanings?
– What are some hugely meritorious activities we can do every day for the purpose of creating a conducive environment for Nibbāna?In addition to what was mentioned, if I have understood this correctly, I believe contemplating on anicca is the highest meritorious activity that we can do in our every day life.I don’t really know much or would like to comment too much on this topic, but thought of sharing an observation / comment.– “The Maha Bodhi Tree is the most exceptional tree in the entire existence”.– “You will be surprised but the original Bodhi Tree is not in India. It is actually in Anuradhapura, Sri Lanka”– “The real Bodhi Tree CAN NOT be destroyed by anything or anyone in the universe because it is the focal point of the Pure Immeasurable Buddha Energy.”If the real Bodhi Tree cannot be destroyed by anything or anyone in the universe, then the current or previous Bodhi tree located in Mahabodhi Temple in India cannot be the real Bodhi tree. Because it’s mentioned:“The original tree under which Siddhartha Gautama sat is no longer living. It was destroyed by a storm in the 6th century AD. However, a descendant of the original tree was planted in its place, and this tree is still alive today. It is located in the Mahabodhi Temple in Bodh Gaya, India, and it is a major pilgrimage site for Buddhists from all over the world.”How can the real Bodhi tree be destroyed by a storm even when Mara and his army cannot even come close to it? This doesn’t make any sense.If the original Bodhi Tree is actually in Anuradhapura, how do we reconcile with the materials that says / mentions the Bodhi Tree in Anuradhapura was brought over by Sangamitta Maha Theri from India?Since this issue or the question I brought up isn’t the most critical on the path. Currently I’m not really seeking an satisfactory answer, but just thought I would share my observation or comment.1 user thanked author for this post.
– “Four vipallasa (nicca, sukha, atta, subha) and three characteristics (anicca, dukkha, anatta.) There should be no confusion”.Thank you for the clarification, that was helpful for me.– If all vipallasa about anicca/anatta are removed, what is left to do?”That’s the thing, it’s my belief that only the Buddha and Arahants understanding of the Noble 8 Fold Path, Tilakkhana, and other teachings are truly said to be “complete and have nothing left to do”, especially relating to the Tilakkhana.I should mention that I’m not disagreeing with the teaching on Sotapanna’s having all anicca/anatta vipallasa removed.But does this mean that Sotapanna’s understanding of anicca/anatta is completed and that they have understood / know everything about anicca / anatta?Maybe it’s like some of the comments mentioned?– “Sottapana are supposed to have realised the Aniccā/Anattā completely YET, they haven’t applied it to their life completely?”
– “Maybe they haven’t realised how Aniccā/Anattā nature of all objects in world ALWAYS leads to dukkhā?”
It’s probably my problem that I can’t truly believe in Sotapanna’s understanding of anicca / anatta “couldn’t be improved upon”.It’s also possible that I might not have been clear on what I meant by “couldn’t be improved upon”.One of the ways I thought of to explain what “couldn’t be improved upon” means. Is that from the first time the sotapanna believed in that they are sotapanna’s and as time goes on, their practice, understanding of the dhamma deepens or is progressing on the path. Their understanding / seeing of anicca/anatta would remain the same? There would be no improvements? No differences?Since I’m not disagreeing with the teaching, yet not able to fully accept that Sotapanna’s understanding of Anicca / Anatta wouldn’t improve as they’re progressing on the Noble 8 Fold Path.I also have this question:– “The question is, what exactly is missing in terms of understanding?”– (A)”Is there a lack of panna in general Or (B) is there only a lack of panna regarding dukkha and asubha”?I believe it would be both A&B. If one is lacking in panna in general, wouldn’t that also affect one’s lack of panna regarding dukkha and asubha?What about anicca / anatta? Would lacking in panna also affect one’s understanding of anicca / anatta?It’s my belief that a Sotapanna understanding / seeing of anicca / anatta would improve as their progressing on the Noble 8 Fold Path.If Venerable Waharaka Thero was alive, I would’ve liked to ask him if he’s understanding of anicca / anatta have gotten better or improved from the time he first started believing he was a Sotapanna to where he is today (at a later time). Unfortunately for us, fortunately he is no longer here, but hopefully I can ask this question to Lal and to others on here.One doesn’t need to comment or answer to this question if one choose not to. What I would like to ask Lal and others that are at least Sotapanna’s is that from the first time they started to believe in that they are Sotapanna’s to where they are today. Have their been any differences / improvements / or has remained the same with their understanding and practice of anicca / anatta?– “The sotapanna has removed all vipallasa about anicca/nicca and anatta/atta. Thus, he/she does not make mistakes regarding the anicca and anatta nature”
I believe the interpretation of “Thus, he/she does not make mistakes regarding the anicca and anatta nature” could be of importance.
My interpretation of what was quoted would be sotapanna’s would know / have understood enough to be not induced / converted / conditioned to the wrong views / understanding of anicca/anatta. They would know / understand the general direction / idea / meaning of anicca/anatta. But to me, it doesn’t necessary mean what Sotapanna’s know or have understood about anicca/anatta “couldn’t be improved upon”.
– “Does it mean, the Sotapanna has full knowledge or panna about anicca/anatta?”
The key words are “has full knowledge”. Based on my current understanding and experience, I don’t believe Sotapanna’s have full knowledge or panna about anicca / anatta”. For me it’s hard to imagine that sotapanna’s understanding of the Tilakkhana and other teachings couldn’t be improved upon. It’s almost like saying, “once one is a Sotapanna, their understanding of anicca/anatta couldn’t be improved upon and that they would have complete knowing and understanding of it”.
I don’t think I could agree to such a statement.
“If the statement, “…rupakkhandha is NOT preserved.“ appears somewhere, it needs to be revised. Please let me know in which post (bullet #) it shows up. I will revise it as above. If it is there, it is only an unintended error”.
“Neither of you stated where I wrote that.”If I remembered correctly . . . you mentioned that in post #44834. But anyways . . .4.Every time you see an object, that “image” goes into the “rupa aggregate” or “rupakkhandha.” However, that rupakkhandha is NOT preserved. When you recall memory, you “regenerate that mental image” in your mind. We will discuss that mechanism in upcoming posts.6.To emphasize, only the four mental components are preserved in the nāma loka. The rupa loka has only “material things,” Thus, rupakkhandha is NOT preserved. The rupa component (the associated mental image) is “re-generated” only when one recalls that past event. We will discuss that recalling process later.Thank you Lang for the example provided. When or if I can think of an appropriate responds to your example, I’ll mention it.
“but actually there is a database system that works somewhat like this“
I don’t know anything about IT, but what’s the name of the database system that works like your example?
I came across the discussion about the language “Magadhi”
From a Venerable Waharaka Thero desana that I came across over a year or more ago. If my memory serves me correctly (I could have forgotten the exact details), but I believe it was mentioned that Magadhi is the Brahma’s language (in the Brahma’s realms), a universal language. It’s the language we living beings communicated with before we devolve into the lower realms.
If I come across the desana again, I’ll post it here.
I believe I can agree / understand / see some of the general ideas / points / teachings relating to what’s being discussed here, but I can’t say I have understood everything.
Instead of quickly coming to conclusions and might possibly cause myself and others confusion and misunderstandings down the road. I feel it would be most beneficial for myself to critically evaluate my own understanding and should ask questions for further clarification, hoping to gain better clarity and understanding in regards to what’s being discussed here.
“In post #40386
It mentions that “namagotta are NOT rupakkhandha”.
I just read that comment. I did not see that statement there.
I apologize for the careless mistake. I am to blame for the confusion and misunderstanding, my apologies. The actual post is #40388
“However, only the “necessary ingredients (vedana, sanna, sankhara, vinnana) that can “re-create” that “image of the tree” is preserved in the namaloka as namagotta. When those ingredients are reflected back to the mind as “dhammā,” the mind can re-create the “image of the tree.” In other words, namagotta are NOT rupakkhandha.”
This is where I need some help with clarifying. Recent reply mentions:
Hopefully, you can confirm that the rupakkhandha is “all mental” and is defined by only the four mental aggregates (but only the first three are enough.) “Thus, in this case, namagotta is purely rupakkhandha”
#1.
I can’t say I’m 100% clear about the 2 bolded statements.
“In other words, namagotta are NOT rupakkhandha”
“Thus, in this case, namagotta is purely rupakkhandha”
I can see the points why the “namagotta are NOT rupakkhandha”, but maybe the problem with my understanding is that I can’t say I’m exactly clear on how namagotta is purely rupakkhandha when namagotta is not rupakkhandha.
From a recent post where it’s mentioned: “i.e., nāmagotta is not the same as rupakkhandha. Still, it comes back as rupakkhandha (corresponding to that time) when recalled.”
If I were to try answer my own question #1. It would be what is mentioned in a recent PD post. “Namagotta is not the same as rupakkhandha”, but it becomes rupakkhandha when we recall a memory.
Is this the same as saying “Thus, in this case, <u>namagotta is purely rupakkhandha” when we recall a memory?</u>
#2.
Having reviewed materials from other PD posts and this thread. It has led me to believe that rupakkhandha is not preserved (stored?) in the namaloka as rupakkhandha but as the 4 mental aggregates.
It’s mentioned:
“The four nāma aggregates are preserved in the nāma loka (immaterial or mental world) as nāmagotta.”
“The four mental aggregates are preserved as a memory record or nāmagotta.”
“Rupakkhanada is not stored directly<br />
9. It is critical to realize that a “rupa” cannot be stored in the viññāṇa dhatu. Only a “mental imprint” of a rupa gets stored. That “mental imprint” is in the four “mental aggregates.”“To emphasize, only the four mental components are preserved in the nāma loka. The rupa loka has only “material things,” Thus, rupakkhandha is NOT preserved.
In post # 44649, it’s mentioned:
“Rupakkhanda is preserved in the namaloka as namagotta”
If I have understood all the italicized sentences under #2 correctly. Rupakkhandha itself isn’t preserved in the namaloka, but “rupakkhandha is preserved (stored?) in the namaloka as namagotta through the 4 mental aggregates? Have I understood this correctly?
I am appreciative to be able to come across other discerning and wise minds. Thanks to other’s effort, questioning and discussions, recently having gone over and reviewed some of them, I was able to learn much. Some of the things mentioned / shared, myself might not have thought of or discerned. I can say I have truly seen and experienced for myself why Kalana mitta’s are 100% of the path and why it’s advised to associate with the wise.Recently having gone over the comments here and in the “Salayatana are not sense faculties” thread. I have a few questions for my own clarification purposes. I would like to give thanks in advance to others patience, time and effort in possibly answering or discussing some of the questions or points that might be brought up.#1
One of the questions that I would like to have clarified is if “rupakkhanda” is preserved / stored (if the word stored means something similar as preserved) in the namagotta?
I have seen most recent comments in the discussions that rupakkhanda is preserved in the namagotta. But I have also come across past comments and a PD post that possibly might state otherwise.
Rupa and Rupakkhandha, Nāma and Nāmagotta
Rupa and rupakkhandha, together with nāma and nāmagotta, help describe two parts of our world: rupa loka and nāma loka. Rupa (forms) are in the rupa loka (material world), and rupakkhandha includes mental images of ALL rupa that we have ever experienced (but not directly preserved.) The four nāma aggregates are preserved in the nāma loka (immaterial or mental world) as nāmagotta.#1A. What does it exactly mean by all rupa that we have ever experienced “not directly preserved”? What’s the difference between not directly preserved and directly preserved?
Related materials to question #1AIn the Salayatana forum discussion, post #44645
“Rupakkhanda is not stored, it is generated as needed from other four aggregates” (not Lal words)
Post #44649:
“Namagotta contains all records of the four mental aggregates”
Within the same post, it mentions “Rupakkhanda is preserved in the namaloka as namagotta”.
#1B. For clarification purpose, namagotta including the 4 mental aggregates also contains all records of rupakkhanda, is this correct?
#2.
In post #40386
It mentions that “namagotta are NOT rupakkhandha”.
I would agree with the statement that “namagotta are NOT rupakkhanda” but I’m not sure if I have understood completely or properly why “namagotta are NOT rupakkhanda”. The reason why I believe namagotta are not rupakkhanda because namagotta contains more than just rupakkhanda, it also contains the other 4 mental aggregates (belonging to nama category), is this accurate / correct?
#3.
I believe a question was brought up “why rupakkhandha is not nama? (Since that rupakkhandha is all mental or mental impressions of rupa and not the rupa out there)”
From one of the PD post, it mentions “The Buddha defined rupa as ALL those that can provide a sensory experience (vinnana)”.
Could one of the possible reasons why rupakkhanda is not nama because rupakkhanda is what actually initiates the sensory experience (phassa) thereby belonging to the rupa category?
#4.
Post # 40496, it mentions that “dense rupa (experienced by the five physical senses are localized, but the nama category (vedana, sanna, sankhara, vinnana) is not localized.
Would rupakkhanda also not be localized?
