[upekkha100]

Lal wrote:
“One could determine for ONESELF (But only a Buddha can determine the status of another person).”

There are at least 2 cases in the Tipitaka where two Ariyas did not know or doubted their Ariya status. They were mentioned on this forum. If someone knows the exact references, please feel free to share.

In one case in the Tipitaka, if I remember correctly, a man kept thinking he did not attain magga phala because he still had angry thoughts, even after getting confirmation by the Buddha. But he was indeed a Sotapanna. (Those angry thoughts were from his patiga, a cetasika that a Sotapanna still has, it is the weaker version of dosa/hatred.)

There was another instance in the Tipitaka where an Arahant did not even know that he/she was an Arahant.

And according to this site, there are jati Sotapannas(those who became Sotapanna in one of their past lives) who when reborn as humans do not know that they are Sotapannas.

This begs the following questions:
1) So if even an Arahant did not know, how can anyone with lesser stages of Nibbana determine this for themselves?

2) Why is it that some Ariyas know with certainty, while others have no idea, and others doubt? What causes one to be certain and causes others to doubt/not know/forget?

Lal wrote:
“The buddha has stated that it is fine, and also fine to declare it too (see Maha Parinibbna Sutta, for example). But of course, one may make such declaration with or without merit.”

I will have to find the relevant part in the sutta to verify.

I would think it is fine too, but only AFTER one received confirmation by the Buddha. Otherwise how can one be sure? We are not omniscient like him.

It seems a lot of people these days think they are enlightened. Whether it is in the Hindu, New age, or even Buddhist community.

3) What if they simply have wrong views/miccha ditthi and mistaking the new changes in their behavior/personality/character/gati for stages of Nibbana? Mistaking their newly attained peaceful mind state and their jhanic symptoms for stages of Nibbana like those wrong views in the Brahmajāla Sutta? A yogi or anyone attaining the 8th jhana could easily mistake that for Nibbana.

My point is, without the Buddha’s confirmation, I think it better to just keep following the Path and not assume one has attained magga phala. This could risk complacency. And this could risk the increase of asmi mana(pride/ego/arrogance). I have seen this to be just the case with a certain famous yogi who implies he is fully enlightened, yet I can sense/feel the energy of his pride even from watching his videos.

[upekkha100]

Unless I misunderstand, another sutta: the Metta (Mettanisamsa) Sutta also seems to say one of the benefits of cultivating metta is being reborn as brahma(benefit #11):
“1. “He sleeps in comfort. 2. He awakes in comfort. 3. He sees no evil dreams. 4. He is dear to human beings. 5. He is dear to non-human beings. 6. Devas (gods) protect him. 7. Fire, poison, and sword cannot touch him. 8. His mind can concentrate quickly. 9. His countenance is serene. 10. He dies without being confused in mind. 11. If he fails to attain arahantship (the highest sanctity) here and now, he will be reborn in the brahma-world.”

https://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/an/an11/an11.016.piya.html

Question:
Now how does one do this? Meaning: How does one cultivate metta/karuna/mudita/upekkha to the level of a brahma(the kind of metta/karuna/mudita/upekkha that a brahma would radiate)? So that one can have higher chances of being reborn a brahma?

And by “metta level of a brahma” I mean as compared to an average person’s metta level. For example, a brahma’s metta would be like 100/100, an average person with low metta would be 30/100(I’m quantifying and using these numbers for sake of using as examples).

To me, it would seem this feat(mastering metta. Attaining 100/100 metta)is not possible ONLY through informal bhavana alone. To clarify further, informal bhavana being the meditation that is done outside of formal sitting meditation:where one tries to think/speak/do actions with metta. Basically being in metta mode all day long, everyday. Majority of one’s sankhara is done with metta. But I don’t think this alone is enough to get metta to the level of a brahma. I think one would need the reinforcement of formal sitting meditation too? Through deep absorption in metta, like via jhana maybe?

[upekkha100]

Lal wrote:
“ALL LIVING BEINGS on this Earth came from the pabhassara brahma realm in the beginning (i.e., each and every living being on this was a brahma at the beginning). ”

Even that tiny bit was very revealing. That does not seem far fetched to me, and would actually make sense.

As I told Lal in the email, if such a book on the Agganna sutta was written I would read it.

Lal, though I disagree with your views regarding this somewhat, I can see where you are coming from.

Thanks for sharing a bit about the sutta.

[upekkha100]

Do I misunderstand the Pathama metta sutta(AN 4.125)?

PureDhamma Pathama Metta Sutta Post

SuttaCentral Pathama Metta Sutta translation

It says one can be reborn in brahma realms if they if they cultivate and sustain metta, karuna, mudita, and upekkha.

Says “abide in that, are committed to it, and meditate on it often without losing it.”

The “abide in that” and “without losing it” implies jhana to me.

So this would mean focus of meditation would be one the four brahmavihara.

Question:
So one can get to jhana via focusing on one of these four: metta/karuna/mudita/upekkha?

[upekkha100]

Tobias wrote:
“But before reaching such a stage one has to analyse the dhamma and needs hints and proof to establish saddha/panna.”

I agree with this.

I was one of the people who requested about this sutta. I’ll repeat some of what I said in the email for others:

There are numerous origin stories of this world/humanity from various cultures around the world. I am the most interested in the Buddha Dhamma version. This is the one that counts in my opinion. This is the one that will probably make the most sense. That extra puzzle piece that could clarify a lot of questions.

In honesty, I will remain curious about the true translation/interpretation/meaning of this sutta until I find it. Even Venerable Moggallana, after becoming an Arahant, seemed to have been curious and explored this universe. Key word being “curious” and “explore” and not “tanha/attachment”. It will not be end of the world if we never know, nor is it necessary. But if one can be curious and explore without attachment or with the least amount of tanha as possible, then I see this as no issue nor hindrance to the Path.

It is a shame the correct translations/meaning/interpretation for this sutta is not available.

Venerable Waharaka has talked about this sutta in a desana.
Venerable Waharaka desana
If anyone who is proficient in Sinhalese can translate his desana or anyone proficient in Pali can translate/interpret this sutta, even just the general layout please share in writing or even a desana. Myself and I’m sure many others would be thankful and be curious to read/listen to it. There is no private messaging system here, so can email me at [email protected].

[upekkha100]

I would like to know about the specific step by step process to get to jhanas as well.

It would have great benefits.

Not only less temptation by sense pleasures, but less struggle fighting against strong sense pleasures as well. The struggle gets annoying/tiring after a while. It would be nice not to have this struggle.

What instructions did the Buddha recommend for anariyas who are following the mundane Path to cultivate the jhanas?

If not through breathing, what was the method he approved of?

What should be the focus? A Dhamma concept? Metta?

I feel I can’t focus on a concept for that long, nor on metta.

[upekkha100]

For the 9 stages of a citta:
1) citta
2) mano
3) manasan
4) hadayan
5) pandaran
6) mana indriyan
7) manayatana
8) vinnana
9) vinnanakkhandha

1) Are the asobhana/sobhana cetasika incorporated at the manasan stage?

2) If not, at which stage are they incorporated?

[upekkha100]

So going back to what I had wanted to point out before:

The 7 universal cetasika of a citta:
1) Phassa
2) Vedana
3) Sanna
4) Cetana
5) Ekaggata
6) Jivitindriya
7) Manasikara

Is the following correct:
-All of those 7 cetasika start out as pure/uncontaminated
-All start out as neutral.
-Whether it is an anariya or Ariya.

Meaning for example:
-Phassa is just phassa, and not yet samphassa at this initial stage.
-Sanna is not yet nicca/sukha/atta.
-Vedana is neither amisa sukha nor amisa dukha. At this early stage, it is neutral too(I remember using listening to a favorite song repeatedly as an example, and was told my vedana would INITIALLY be neutral before contaminating with tanha each time I’d listen to it.)

Question:
It is said cetana is the cetasika that include the other cetasikas: asobhana cetasika or sobhana cetasika. Both asobhana and sobhana cetasika generate kamma. Bad kamma and good kamma. Neither are neutral. So at the early stage of a citta, is the cetana cetasika neutral too like phassa/sanna/vedana/and the rest of the universal cetasika? Meaning: at the very early initial stage, is it correct to say that cetana does not incorporate any of the kamma generating cetasikas(neither asobhana cetasika nor sobhana cetasika)?

[upekkha100]

I know I may seem annoying but I’ll explain why I’m discussing this. I think it is important what words are used. I can list the reasons. One of them being: because unlike other belief systems, I have noticed everything in Buddhism is not random nor by chance. It is deliberate and precise. There is a reason for the words that are used to convey the message. It clears away confusion, not cause it. So if the Buddha called an Arahant’s consciousness as vinnana, it would seem odd/inconsistent/confusing to me. But I’ll make that topic some other time to get other peoples input. I don’t think continuing that here would be appropriate and just drag on this discussion fruitlessly.

[upekkha100]

Taking into account the following points from Lal and another previous comment:
-Viññāna means “without ñāna” or without wisdom:
-Viññāna also means “defiled consciousness”;
-vi = defiled, nana = wisdom (vinnana)
-It is understood that the vinnana of an Arahant is pure or undefiled.
-when one attains the Arahanthood, one will have “undefiled or pure consciousness”.

So vinnana means:
-Without wisdom
-Defiled consciousness

-Yet an Arahant is the embodiment of wisdom.
-Yet an Arahant has undefiled consciousness.

So how can an Arahant have vinnana?

To say an Arahant has vinnana, is equivalent to saying:
-Arahant is without wisdom
-Arahant has defiled consciousness

“Vinnana of an Arahant” is a contradiction. Like saying dry water.

For example:
If vinnana is defiled consciousness, it can be compared to a dirty cloth.
An anariya’s vinnana(dirty cloth) is unclean.

To say an Arahant’s vinnana is “undefiled” is like saying: an Arahant’s dirty cloth is clean.

To me the following would make more sense:
-An anariya’s consciousness is vinnana.
-An Arahant’s consciousness is just nana(minus the vi).
-Goal of purifying the mind would be to eventually change one’s vinnana to nana.

-An anariya’s consciousness is defiled. Without wisdom. Anariyas do not experience things as they are, not see true nature of reality. Rather an anariya labels experiences as the following 3 ways:
1) good because they like it based on lobha. Generate amisa sukha vedana.
2) bad because they dislike it based on dosa. Generate amisa dukha vedana.
3) neutral. neither like nor dislike based on moha(delusion, a defilement). Generate
amisa upekkha.

-An Arahant’s consciousness is undefiled. If they have only nana rather than vinnana that means with wisdom(because nana means wisdom). They know the true nature of reality. They do not label experiences as “good/bad/neutral based on moha”, but they experience things as they are, see things as neutral, but their neutrality is different from that of an anariya in that an Arahant’s neutrality is not based on moha. Their neutrality is niramisa upekkha vedana, based on wisdom from their pure undefiled minds.

[upekkha100]

Lal wrote:
“Without incorporating previous memories, an Arahant will not be able to recall past memories, etc.”

Recalling past memories: is that not done with the manasikara cetasika? Manasikara cetasika is part of the 7 universal cetasika that make up a pure citta before it degrades to vinnana. Then it would seem an Arahant would not need to degrade to neither a bad vinnana nor good vinnana to recall back memories. It is already done in the first 7 universal cetasika of a pure citta.

And I’d think identifying is also done by the sanna cetasika(also initially part of the 7 universal cetasika of a pure citta) and also at the manasan stage(which comes before vinnana).

[upekkha100]

Lal wrote:
“and thus is still called vinnana and vinnanakkhandha (it is understood that for an Arahant those are undefiled).”

If that is the case then there are many instances at this site that seem to make that point unclear.

For example:
Citta, Manō, Viññāna – Stages of a Thought

From #1:
“I cringe when I see some online comments even say viññāna is Nibbāna. It is exactly the opposite: One attains Nibbāna when one gets rid of viññāna, or more precisely when one purifies one’s mind to the extent that a thought does not contaminate to the viññāna stage. “

[upekkha100]

9 Stages of a citta. Going from pure to contaminated:
1) citta
2) mano
3) manasan
4) hadayan
5) pandaran
6) mana indriyan
7) manayatana
8) vinnana
9) vinnanakkhandha

-Vinnana and vinnanakkhanda come at stages 8 and 9.
-An Arahant’s citta does not go beyond nor contaminate beyond stage 3: manasan.

So how can an Arahant have any vinnana?

[upekkha100]

Do I have this correct:
1) Sobhana cetasika lead to good vinnana.

2) An Arahant still has sobhana cetasikas.

3) A good vinnana is not contaminated.

4) An Arahant still has good vinnana.

[upekkha100]

I think the revision that you have made in the The Grand Unified Theory of Dhammā – Introduction
post is incorrect. I think what you had written before the revision was correct.

Before the revision:
A) “One actually strives to remove greed, hate, and ignorance, which are “san”. When this is done, other three causes are automatically removed. ”

After the revision:
B) “The three good roots non-greed, non-hate, and non-ignorance are not removed, but the CONDITIONS (tanhā and upādāna) for them to lead to rebirth are removed at that time. Therefore, one will not be reborn even in the “good realms”.

Your revision(B) says the 3 good roots are not removed. The sutta, AN 3.34, says that the 3 good roots are removed. That sutta matches A(what you had written before the revision).

[Author]

Posts