Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
– “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?
Compliments to all the participants in this thread. Great question brought forth by Saket and others in this and other threads, even I didn’t / couldn’t think of some of those comments or questions being asked.Insightful and helpful responds by Lal as usual. Tobi sharing his thoughts and own understanding of the dhamma in this thread and not being completely satisfied with some of the explanations. I always believe that “it’s better to be wrong, than blindly believing that I’m right”. Several times, Lal and others have helped me to correct any wrong views and understanding of the dhamma that I might have had. I’m really glad that both Saket and Tobi brought up / mentioned the things that they did. In the end from discussions, what I hope for is that myself and others are able to receive answers / feedback that can benefit our practice and help to correct any wrong view’s and misunderstandings that we may have in regards to the dhamma.In regards to Saket question and Lal’s respond. If I have understood this correctly and by using my current jati (life) as an example. Any kamma that was done in my current and previous bhava / jati through the akusala-mula P.S. cycle within 91 maha kappa of this jati, those “certain” kamma vipaka’s can manifest within my current life (jati). But some other “certain” kamma vipaka potent before the 91 maha kappa from this life time is nullified.From other’s more knowledgeable than me on this topic, it’s mentioned that it hasn’t been stated “if” or “the duration of time” before aparāpariyāyavedanīya kamma (that can bring rebirth) will be nullified.From what I can see, it would make sense that aparāpariyāyavedanīya kamma (that can bring rebirth) would either be:(A) have a longer duration before being nullified than “other (weak?)” kamma vipaka potentials that falls within 91 maha kappa of one’s current bhava / jati.Or(B) It’s something permanent (imprints or records) like the nama gotta. (What I can think of at this moment) “maybe” with energy (vinnana) potential making contact with those imprints or records give rise to bhava / jati.But only from the same life stream vinnana can give energy potential to those imprints or records (one’s own panchakkhanada). When one attains Nibbana, those imprints or records stop recording, but would still be available for those with super powers like the Buddha’s to view.From my own life experience and what I can observe, my belief is that there’s got to be “something” that’s recording / imprinting / inscribing, etc., my every single thoughts / sights / feelings, etc. If there is no such a thing, how would my memory work? So, it’s my belief that there’s got to be “something” out there carrying out this mechanism.From the sutta’s, I’m not 100% certain if I’m remembering this correctly, but sometimes when someone attained parinibbana, it’s mentioned that they are no where to be found. Besides the obvious understanding that they are no longer anywhere in the 31 realms of existence. Maybe an additional / supplemental way to further explain what happens to a satta who has attained parinibbana is that the recording of the thoughts, sights, etc., (panchakkhanada) stops and that there is no further / into the future panchakkhanada of that satta to be viewed, even by those with super powers.An example that I can think of to better / further describe what I’m trying to say is that by imagining myself (TGS) as movie director / creator / and acting in my own movies. Myself being in a movie is like having a record / imprint of my panchakkhanada for myself and other’s to view. As long as I’m alive and making movies, my panchakkhanada would keep accumulating / recording. But let’s say this (I, me) life stream have attained parinibbana, then my panchakkhanada would stop accumulating / growing / recording or that TGS will no longer appear in anymore future movies.If someone were to say “what movie will TGS appear next?” We can’t say what movie will TGS appear next because he’s no longer in this world, but we could still say what movie TGS has appeared in before parinibbana since we have records of what movies TGS has appeared in and we can re-watch them.Something I would like to mention is that I would like to apologize as I haven’t put much time and effort into what we’re discussing here as this is not where my mind and effort is currently at. I’m just throwing out some ideas and it’s possible it might have some flaws / inconsistencies.I know someone mentioned about the nama gotta in another thread. Can Saket question and what it’s being discussed here have some kind of relation / connection to the nama gotta?In regards to Lal and Tobi discussion here, I believe sometimes asking / answering some basic / fundamental questions first could be beneficial. I have observed and sometimes guilty myself that we sometimes get so caught up in details, that we don’t realize or see that a more basic or fundamental question might be helpful as well for the discussion or our own understanding. I believe one of these questions relating to what’s being discussed is that “can there be a living being without rupa? or the 5 aggregates?”If there cannot be a living being without rupa, then what kind / type rupa would this be in the highest arupa realms?Currently I don’t know how much more time and effort I’ll put into thread, just hope whatever was mentioned can be of any help and stand for corrections if there was any mistakes or misunderstandings.The correct translation is, “Thinking: ‘They did wrong to me, but that is only a result of a previous (unavoidable) kamma, you get rid of resentment.”
I had a life experience that can relate to Lal’s translation.In 2019 while working at a job, I was already learning and practicing dhamma. Although far from perfect in practice, I did my best. I felt I fulfilled my duties and responsibilities and beyond as a worker and colleague. Never missed a day of work. Did my best to avoid akusala kamma especially vaci, such as not talking bad or behind people’s back, etc . . .I felt I was in good relations with my co-workers or so it seems . . . Long story short, one day at the end of my shift, my manager told me that I was being demoted (lesser paid). I was so surprised, I truly felt “what did I ever do while working here to deserve something like this?”. I felt my work performance was excellent, never done wrong to anyone at the work place and the demotion was unjustified and unfair.I don’t remember if I ever asked why I was being demoted. I was pretty upset at that time and knew that I shouldn’t say more because I might get even more upset. Thought it was a good idea to get out of there asap.My suspicious was that one or more of my colleague “influenced” my manager, making my manager believing and being influenced, leading to my demotion. What was most upsetting was that I never talked and minimized any bad thought that would harm my colleagues in any way. In fact, I felt I did more positive things for them than any wrongdoings.At that time I had two choices, either quit or choose to work there with lower pay, with people that I felt backstabbed me and being labeled as someone that got demoted (bruised ego).I think I just said something just like “okay” to my manager and got out of there as soon as I could to cool down. After removing myself from the contact, some time later, I thought of “what if that was from some current or previous lives’ vipaka?” After thinking like that for some time, I was mostly able to stop the wheeling of dukkha, although there were traces / remnants left.In the end I decided to stay at the workplace (only for a month and half longer). One of the two major reason’s why I chose not to quit at that time was because I believed that it was a really great opportunity for me to practice the dhamma, I really felt that.Imagine working / being in constant contact with the people who you felt had betrayed / backstabbed you and not giving into hate towards them and trying to forgive them. It was difficult at the beginning, but as time went on, I was able to slowly forgive others. At the time of quitting from the job, I held minimal to almost no resentment towards others and bitterness towards the situation that occurred.It was really thinking along the lines of “They did wrong to me, but that is only a result of a previous (unavoidable) kamma”, that helped me forgive others and to move on from the situation.
When I reflect back on my life from the last 10 plus years, mostly whenever some kind of event / situation / circumstance that seemed negative, unpleasant, undesirable, unwelcomed, etc., was happening at that time. At a later time, it turned out those events and experiences was actually beneficial and favorable for me. As I was placed in better conditions / situations (like work environment and other things) and the experiences helped with my dhamma practice in the long term.1 user thanked author for this post.
“To me this is a very big deal. I don’t know if I’ll ever go into why this so . . . because there’s so many layers to this . . .”
Actually I come to realize that it’s not that of a big deal, which I’ll explain at a later time. But it was something that I wasn’t aware of, but could be used to learn of it. In a way I was surprised and rushed words, spoken too soon.
I was going to say as well . . . “If that’s the case, then we would’ve all have attained Nibbana many times . . . “
The reason’s why I said this was because to indirectly hopefully share an example of where one can use the dhamma where one is learning / understands for discernment. One of the other ways to express what will be mentioned.
I’m sure everyone here knows about the sansara process, how we have been reborn in the hells and heavens without a discernable beginning. I believe in our previous life, we all had attained the 4 jhana’s and been born in the highest of heavens. My understanding is that the 4th jhana is related to upekkha. If we all had attained the 4th jhana some time in our previous lives and that if by achieiving / remaining in upekkha can get rid of or eradicate seeds, thereby leading to no more new fruits. Then wouldn’t we have already attained nibbana and many times over?
One can force mind to be equanimous for only so long. Then again one will start to create merits or demerits.
One can also get attached to equanimity.
“They have good description about end goal, but they don’t share any methodology about how to mold mind to permanently behave in the said equanimous way.”
I can’t say my book learning or understanding of upekkha is much, but from understanding so far, it seems like the permanent way to mold the mind to behave “in the said equanimous way” is by developing and having Lokuttara Samma ditthi leading the way.
I can’t say I know or have understood everything being discussed here, but is this one of the uncertainties / questions / main gist that’s being raised here?“Mano sankhara never get to the abhisankhara stage.”” In context, there is some possibility that mano sankhara could be read as abhisankhara.”Candana Bhikkhu’s new video ‘Goenka Cult’ vs The Dhamma
I just woke up and came across the thread Lal mentioned, but I’m about to head off to work so I haven’t had the time scrutinize everything in the thread or watch the video’s (which I might later on), but I quickly scanned through the comments and something really really caught my eyes.
“I have also been to the Davos WEF summit. And while I have seen Goenka’s UN talk in 2000
I never knew about Goenka’s WEF Davos involvement.But now it all makes perfect sense… especially given how Klaus Schwab’s top man, Yuval Noah Harari, is (or was) a Senior AT.
Here you have one of the highest most influential people in the entire World Economic Forum
Yuval Noah Harari, also acting as one of the highest teachers in the Goenka group (cult)
where Harari is “teaching” people meditation as a Senior Assistant Teacher (AT).”To me this is a very big deal. I don’t know if I’ll ever go into why this so . . . because there’s so many layers to this . . . but thought of sharing the link that relates to this discussion . . .
“Is it really true that by remaining equanimous we can “get rid of or eradicate seeds, thereby leading to no more new fruit?”
I was going to say as well . . . “If that’s the case, then we would’ve all have attained Nibbana many times . . . “
– “Every time you remain equanimous with the sensations, i.e., not react to them, you get rid of them. So by remaining equanimous, these “seeds” get eradicated, leading to no more new fruit.”
Is it really true that by remaining equanimous we can “get rid of or eradicate seeds, thereby leading to no more new fruit?My understanding is that “seeds aren’t necessary get ridden off or eradicated by remaining equanimous . . .”
I hope what is mentioned can be helpful for our learning and understanding.
I read the pdf several years back. At that time, I must’ve had questions about and thoughts of learning more about Buddhist cosmology and came across the book.
I can’t say I have studied or know alot about Theravada orthodox teachings on Buddhist cosmology, but depending on what’s meant by “the accuracy of the book”, I believe it would / should? fall in line mostly with Theravada orthodox teachings. Included in the title of the book, “according to Theravada and Sarvsativada sources”.
Based on my understanding at that time and currently, I can’t say how accurate all the things mentioned in the book are, but I believe it should be accurate enough that it can help one to get the general idea about the topic and the different subjects. I mostly read quickly through the book, but I do believe the book gathers Theravada teachings and sources on the subjects in one book.
If one does read it, my advice is to use one’s discernment and decide on what to take in and discard or use or not use from the book. I believe the materials in the book can possibly be used to cross reference, compared, and additional information about the different realms and beings.
But in my opinion, the material’s in the book are not the most important area / dhamma teachings to focus on.
One part of the book that did drew my interest or I was most interested in (focused) was the part about devolution of humans and the future of humanity, which is the agganna sutta. Puredhamma also has a post and materials on that sutta.
By comparing and relating the two materials mentioned, as well Venerable Waharaka Thero subtitled English desana on anicca. The experiences benefited my learning of “anicca khayatthena”.
