Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
Thank you Mahendran,
I am finding difficulty understanding how it is still not clear to you, especially after Lal’s comprehensive explanation.
“why should we refer to them and say may I be able to develop the characteristics of Devas ”
I will try to re-phrase, perhaps it will help.
The qualities of the devas, or those that they had developed, mainly dana and sila, are IN THEMSELVES worthy to pursue, to develop and to ingrain into one’s gati. For one thing,they lead to good births. For another, IN TIME, to Nibbana. They constitute ‘the basics’. But just because one practices those deva qualities does not make one or any deva in any way ‘holy’ on that account. Other necessary qualities are to a large extent still absent in them, mostly wisdom (panna). That is why at times they relapse into unwholesome acts with humans.
For that reason they are not worthy of worship or adoration of any kind; and that goes too for devas WITH magga phala – what to say of those without. And that is also why one should not place too much importance on these ‘contacts’ with devas; anything that comes of such ‘contacts’, is,for better or for worse, at best temporary and to limited effect.
Better the few words of an Ariya here in the human realm, even of One with lower magga phala, understood, accepted and acted upon ; that leads in time to the cessation of all suffering, to happiness, to Nibbana, beyond the realms of devas and of brahmas. And you are here now in such a position. You have earned that right. I urge you to make the most of it.
If still it remains not clear to you, I will try again, although I cannot see now how I can go any further. Others may.
with Metta
Mahendran,
Just the fun of it.
Remember they are not perfected in wisdom, far from it. They got that deva birth through one or other good deed, mostly generosity. It is like a good-natured and generally well-behaved graduate with higher education teasing or taunting a colleaugue because he has nothing better to do. Still a schoolboy at heart.
Most of them are not on the Path. They have no idea that their stay there will end, even unexpectedly,so they are given to such nonsense at times. There is a sutta where a certain deva was enjoying himself with one thousand ‘dove-footed nymphs’. Suddenly 500 of them disappeared there and then. He went looking for them with his deva eye and saw they had appeared in an apaya – one the hells, if I remember correctly.
For the rest, I am with what Akvan says.
Metta
Yeos,
My understanding is this (and I find myself contemplating the devas and their conditions of existence frequently):
Reading what preceded and what followed the section you quote, the basic facts are there. DEVAS CANNOT UNDO OR ALTER THE KAMMA VIPAKA OF HUMANS. They may ‘intervene’ only to provide some temporary relief, or in some cases, (unknown to us) with advice in indirect ways or to protect in dangerous circumstances, having seen that with the divine eye. Now we do not know whether a particular deva is one with magga phala. Many, if not most,are not. They are just in the same predicament that we are in; actually, in a more disadvantageous one.
Whatever ‘favours’ a deva grants cannot be a refuge, cannot be IN ITSELF a solution in any definite or permanent way. It may be of assistance ‘on the way’ but the Refuge is always the Buddha, the Dhamma and the Sangha:
Kamma vipaka will work itself out in the appropriate conditions when they arise, be it here now in the human or later in other realms. No deva (or brahma or the Buddha Himself) can come in the way of that.So devas cannot act as ‘intermediaries’ between kamma and kamma vipaka. Vipaka will depend on kamma, and kamma is done or left undone by us alone. This is the main point.
with Metta
Thank you Lal.
I had missed it. You had missed it. I do not know how many others have as well. Probably most. Is it too extravagant to suppose that it is meant that way? – dhammata.
With Infinite Gratitude!
Lal:
I myself had made reference to that Sutta (AN 9.12) in the post ‘Sotapanna information from the Sutta-pitaka’ in the Sotapanna Forum (18 Oct) having come across it myself 9 MONTHS after Sybe quoted AN 3.87 in the same context (of the 3 types of Sotapannas) back on 24 Jan.
Although we had discussed this, I now find that one point I missed ,and a very significant one, was the very last verse:
‘Na tāvāyaṃ, sāriputta, dhammapariyāyo paṭibhāsi bhikkhūnaṃ bhikkhunīnaṃ upāsakānaṃ upāsikānaṃ. Taṃ kissa hetu? Māyimaṃ dhammapariyāyaṃ sutvā pamādaṃ āhariṃsūti. Api ca mayā, sāriputta, dhammapariyāyo pañhādhippāyena bhāsito”ti.’
‘Sāriputta, this discourse should not be taught to bhikkhus, bhikkhunis, lay male disciples and female disciples until such time. What is the reason? May they be not negligent hearing this discourse. Yet I teach it to those who are wise’
Meaning, to my mind, that when one knows that one is free from the apayas, the tendency to stop striving creeps in UNLESS one also has the wisdom to see the consequences of that and strives first against that. Because it says: ‘It should not be taught to Bhikkhus…etc’ yet the Buddha Himself is teaching it here. But His intention is that it reaches, and be of benefit to, those with wisdom. The rest had better not know about it. For the teaching Bhikkhus cannot tell who has wisdom and who has not. But teach they must. How it affects the listeners will depend on their having or not having wisdom.
How do you see this?
Thank you
Firewrns says:
“For me, I think that existence will cease once we attain Nibbana. Whichever the case is, it will not matter much once we attain Nibbana, for there would be no dukkha for it to even matter.”
Not only is there no dukkha. Nibbana is a positive state of being for it is the opposite of anicca dukkha and anatta. It is in fact sukkha. It is nicca, sukkha and atta. That is, whatever we like there is worth it, fruitful, leads to satisfaction, and that is sukkha and that in turn is the basis of atta, perfection, ‘of true essence’, the ‘Deathless’. How can all that apply to a ‘being’ who does not exist? It is a contradiction in terms.
I too have aveccapasada in the Buddha. I do not see how that aveccapasada can be increased in any way. It is indeed the Refuge of my life as I live it, no mere conclusion brought about by the intellect and ‘stored away’ with the other views that make up ‘me’.
The Buddha ‘compared the Parinibbana of an Arahant to the extinguishing of a flame’, true, but not ‘where it ceases to exist’, but again yes when ‘it would also be meaningless for us to say where it is going’. If asked where the flame has gone, whether north, south, east or west we would simply be unable to answer. Not that it has not gone anywhere, because that would not be consistent with Nibbana being icca, sukkha and atta, simply that we can have no conception of where it has gone. Certainly beyond the 31 realms in sansara.
So I take the Buddhas’s words to mean: it is impossible to figure out ,do not try to figure out where and what Nibbana is. It IS. That is all you can know about it. The task consists in getting there. That is why I am here.
Metta
Sybe:
Let us start by seeing what the Tipitaka has to say concerning this.
1) beings have been around from beginingless time (sansara)
2) on the attainment of Arahanthood beings attain ‘the Deathless’, literally. (Nibbana)
2a) Udana 8.3 is speaking about Nibbana: ajātaṃ abhūtaṃ akataṃ asaṅkhataṃ.(an unborn, unbecome, unmade, unconditioned) is the Refuge from the :jātassa bhūtassa katassa saṅkhatassa (the born, become, made, and conditioned).So we have; beings who have always existed in the past (in sansara) and will continue to exist forever in Nibbana in the future after that. Both taken as one stream of existence,clearly then there is eternality to the existence of beings.Yet this does not go against the Buddha’s refutation of the doctrine of eternalism, because there what He was refuting was the idea of ‘those eternalists who assert the existence of a ‘Self’, that is of an UNCHANGING self or abiding personality throughout. As it is, beings are ever-changing (i,e, non-self) in sansara through the many different bhava they acquire, but will be non-changing in Nibbana (Self).
- ‘By a stable element i mean a stable element, an unconditioned element, an element which was never born, does not change in the meantime and does not end. I am convinced such an element is present, and it is not an illusion.’ –
But Sybe, is this not the being itself? And it has been said that beings are unique. So what makes for that uniqueness? Or is it inherent in the being, quite apart from the presence (sansara) or absence (Nibbana) of the pancakkhandhas.? Is this what you are getting at?
Is this what you mean by: ‘It is the base, the essence, the ground of any living being. It is always present but not seen because of our obsession and identification with CONDITIONED PHENOMENA?’ It cannot be Nibbana you are referring to, for that is ATTAINED, not ‘always present’ in us.
So what is it?
Lal,
“No progress can be made outside the Buddha Sasana”.
Thank you.
‘a Sotapanna (or a Sakadagami anugami) may not make any progress in a particular human birth (due to unfavourable conditions) …” what if that applied to all the births of that human bhava, that is that bhava itself, will that bhava ‘count’ as one of those still left at that time (for no progress has been made) yet one more bhava will have been gone through? Or…dhammata will work against that eventuality. Is that it?
I want to clear this.
And…. Lvalio: thank you for your kind and sincere words and for your contributions. I feel deeply grateful.
May you attain the Deathless!Is it not that once on the Path, one needs no external help until one reaches Arahanthood?
That is, within seven bhava the Arahanthood will be attained (if it is not implied that those bhava take place in a Buddha sasana AND in a family with access to the Dhamma, but THAT would then be ‘external help’). But a bhava in a Buddhas sasana is extremely rare.
I see it like this:
If ‘one would just be a Sotapanna for the duration of that life’, and that may happen over and over for the next six bhava, then no progress can be made and Arahanthood will not be attained, for by far the most bhavas are outside of Buddha sasanas,or in families where Dhamma is unknown, yet they add up to the necessary seven, so progress will be made even outside of a Buddha sasana,or outside of a Dhamma environment in a Buddha sasana, given that no further external help is necessary.
firewrns.
In addressing Sybe you say: ‘Unfortunately I can no longer locate that post for further reference, so do correct me if I am wrong.’
Click under Sybe’s profile- sybe07 -then select ‘replies created’. Chances are the post you are looking for is there (one of 223 !) but then it is only a question of time – if not it will under ‘topics started’, an easier search (38) but less likely.
Metta
Sybe,
If you would allow a word of advice from one participant to another,
Getting to understand all about vinnana dhatu, even getting to experience it, would not help in the least in tackling, let alone eliminating, your,on your own admission, ‘many problems, kilesa’s, greed, hate, delusion, fear. Nothing i do not have.’
I share your eagerness to know about these things. Before coming across Buddhadhamma, this delving into concepts like Infinity and Eternity was for decades my ‘favourite private domain’ so to speak. Up to about a year ago I had to pull myself forcibly away from this almost natural tendency of mine. Now it is much easier to do so. Why? Getting into that jhana, even being reborn in a corresponding arupavacara realm, would do nothing in the way of attaining or progressing in magga phala (you may still end up in an apaya)- what to say of merely philosophizing about it and trying to figure out the experience of it?
Your priority is to deal with the many problems you mention. Concentrate on that. Time is ticking. “– What is critical is to avoid dasa akusala or immoral deeds (miccha ditthi being the most important), and to cultivate kusala (moral deeds).” There, Sybe, simply stated, the way to deal with your problems. Getting around it will not be that easy though.
Metta
Sybe,
Unconditioned. But not an element.
By space I mean the Infinite Container in contrast with the infinite number of the contained, the elements, within it, from superclusters of galaxies and all the stars, planets and dust clouds and all else they contain to single suddhastakas diffused in space to the order of one in a cubic light year, if that were the case; any ‘element’whatsoever, however big or small.
“..it has no cause, it has never arisen, it was always there and it will never cease too. ”
I always ask myself: can it be otherwise?
If the first three were otherwise, out of what could space possibly arise in time? And what of the time before that? What would have occupied that ‘space’ before that space arose. Only space. With the fourth, if space could cease to be, what would there be left? Only space. So it cannot be destroyed either.
“I do not know how anyone could ever experience infinite space or infinite vinnana.”
Here I take refuge in the Buddha. He said both can be experienced, along with the other two experiences of Infinite Nothingness and Infinite Neither-perception-Nor-Non perception. From the ‘common sense’ or experiential aspect, the only analogy for Infinite that now comes to mind is the feeling of unbounded love we have when we love some one immensely. We are unable to set a limit to it if we are asked to. But that unbounded-ness is in the sense of depth, of an ‘inner’ infinity not in the spatial sense of an outer unbounded-ness.
The replies of others may well be more helpful here especially if they have actually experienced such.
Metta
Sybe,
Please allow me to state my view:
Science comes up with theories. Sometimes those theories are confirmed as fact, at other times they are refuted by science itself. But in the long run. Scientists can be as dogmatic as medieval Christianity in defending views that have become accepted by the orthodox scientific community – the Big Bang is one of them.
You do not need Buddhadhamma to see that space cannot be created. Nor can time.Bot are eternal and infinite. But the Big Bang theorists, supported by their own equations,insist that both were effects of the Big Bang. As I once asked an ‘expert’ online: ‘Well then, where did the Big Bang take place if not in space? ‘ And as an aside: ‘ Into what is the Universe expanding if not into Space?’ But this ‘expert’ could make no distinction between the space within the universe (where the forces generated by the supposed Big Bang give rise, among other things, to the ‘curvature of space’ and, wait for it, the ‘expansion (!!) of space’, both of which may possibly be effects only on the space contained WITHIN the big-bang universe) and the infinite Space beyond. To his mind space was created by the Big Bang. Full stop. Any opposing view is treated with ridicule, ‘unscientific’.
What deserves ridicule is in fact the idea that, when space is already infinite, where will the expansion take place? How can Infinite Space expand? Into what? Where? Or are we to imagine space with different grades of tenuousness, layer upon layer, different ‘densities of space’, space folding onto itself (in the absence of expansion without). Or how absurd can it get?
Common sense, Buddhadhamma and science itself will in time deal a big bang to the Big Bang.
“Buddha Dhamma…belongs to the dhamma category, and hence “anatta (or without substance) AT THE END, after one has attained the Arahanthood”
In my opinion a distinction should here be made about Buddhadhamma 1) in its absolute sense and scope and 2) in its relation to an individual being.
Lal’s quote above refers to the second instance. That being so, yet Buddhadhamma applies for ever and everywhere in ‘this world’ (sansara), irrespective of whether a Buddha appears in any particular’10,000 world system’ to proclaim it. At all other times in that particular world system and in all others where the Dhamma is not being proclaimed, It exists in abeyance, as it were – unmanifest.
What I mean is that the eternal laws of nature operate whether a Buddha proclaims them or not. In this sense, are they not Atta? – for ever and everywhere valid, albeit in sansara.
I sense that this is what firewrns was referring to. Please correct me if I misread you, firewrns.
Metta
“I need to know where this quote came from..Please always provide a link when you quote.”
To clarify:
firewrns did that already: (January 23, 2019 at 12:31 am; above):
“Also, in the Sarakaani Sutta (SN 55.24), it was stated (in the third and second last paragraphs just before the footnotes, as translated by access to insight):”
– – – – – – – – – – – – –
For the Pali:/suttacentral.net/sn55.24/en/sujato:
Still, they have these qualities: api cassa ime dhammā honti the faculties of faith, energy, mindfulness, immersion, and wisdom. saddhindriyaṃ … pe … paññindriyaṃ. And they have a degree of faith and love for the Buddha.Tathāgate cassa SADDHAmattaṃ hoti PEMAmattaṃ
metta
