Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
“…they may have accumulated infinite merits in their infinite existences, still, the depletion of so much merit might leave more opportunities for their demerits to bear fruit, perhaps at the cuti-patisandhi moment.”,… coupled with Lal’s:
“…No living being has an infinite existence. Their lifetimes may be very long in terms of our time scale that we are used to. However, even the lifetime of an arupavacra brahma (which can be many aeons), is a just a blip the samsaric time scale.Since there is no beginning to sansara, and therefore also no beginning to the acquiring of merits (as also of demerits), then they have indeed ‘accumulated infinite merits in their infinite (in the past) existences’ But Lal is also right,as I see, because their lives there are inherently limited as to duration, so however long those lifetimes are, even if they were infinite, the merits being infinite as well, they would remain stuck there for ever.
…”there could be many who are Sotapanna Anugami, and would be very much interested.”
I was under the impression that, apart from those who attain a deva bhava solely due to merits, the others would be (ariyas) who had developed Sakadagami bhava in a human life immediately preceding that.
Meaning: are not Sotapannas and Sotapannas Anugani still attached to gross-material existence ? How is it that they can attain a deva realm (through magga phala) lower than that of a Sakadagami? They are freed of only the four lowest realms, not the human one.
y not
Thank you Lal…
…for elaborating on various aspects and those 1) not thought of
by myself:-people may be automatically motivated take care of him. They of course would not even know that he is a Paccekabuddha ‘
…and 2) even more for those actually at variance with what I said:
– So, even though we think that a person would start cultivating abisankhara (gati) SPECIFICALLY to become a Buddha or a Paccekabuddha, that is not correct.-
Ever so grateful
y not
Johnny,
‘I also think that the Paccekabuddha is not inclined to teach’…that is what I meant by (it is)’not in them’ to teach.
As to the second question: Is it given that a Paccekabuddha receives alms in the first place? If he does it will be in return for giving moral teachings. If not, his means of making a living will be a proper one. I do not know. So like yourself I will wait for an answer from one who knows.
Metta
Hello Johnny,
As I see, it all depends on the initial determination made aeons and aeons ago by each (type) of Buddha. It is recorded ,even, that those who were to become Buddhas were given this confirmation by several other Buddhas in stages as they enconuntered Them in previous aeons. (Why this is not the case also with Paccekabuddhas (if it be so) I do not know.)
“…sammāsambuddha, and even he hesitates to attempt to teach.” This is ‘the mind interfering’, but in reality a Buddha has no choice BUT to teach. So it is not that the Buddha decided to teach because Brahma implored him to – the role of Brahma there was to ‘remind’ him of his true calling, which HE himself had taken upon himself from the start.
As to why Paccekabuddhas can’t teach Dhamma, it can only be a matter of their gathis – just like a poet or painter who immerse themselves in their activity for the pleasure and satisfaction of it without ‘going public’;it is simply not’in them’ to do this.
I hope this helps towards further reflection
Metta
Hello Alay:
As I read and understand the gati pertaining to a particular bhava manifiest only in that bhava; think what would follow if it were otherwise (!) so, yes, any others aquired in a different bhava would lie dormant.
So in the case that you mention, any human gati acquired in a human bhava will re-surface and develop only once another human bhava is attained. This goes too for other realms (human to deva, deva to human and so on).
One must not confuse this with the case where, say, a human ‘develops’ a deva bhava by thinking and acting like a deva and through the workings of paticca samuppada is inevitably reborn in the deva realm.
See what others have to say,
Metta
Tobias:
As a rule of thumb I distrust any Mahāyāna concept or tenet. This one about Buddhas postponing their Parinibbana until ‘all living beings’ areready for It as well is no different. It is easy to show that it makes no sense. I know I do not have to elaborate on that. However,
….however: we know that devas and brahmas from other ‘10,000 world systems’came to listen to the Buddhas’s desanas. Now it depends what is meant exactly by ‘in the same solar system’ in your quote. I tried to get the Pali translation for AN 1.177 but did not succeed. You will of course know that there are various ‘coglomerations’of world sysyems.
From Theories of Nature and the Universe: Comparison of Pure Buddhist Philosophy,by Muditha Champika p.33: there are several collections of such systems: Sahassi Culanika, dvisahassi majjimikalokadatu, trisahasra-mahashasra (respevtively 1000, 10,000 and 100,000 world systems). A collection of 100,000 such is a Chtu-sahashri-Loka-datu). Then follow Dasa-Sahashri ( 1 trillion: 1000×10 ^9). This seems to me to accord with the most recent calculations of both the number of stars in the Galaxy and also the number of galaxies in the Universe. Up to a decade or so ago the highest estimate was 200,000,000,000 in each case. Science ever appoaches the Dhamma concepts in even their detail .Then it is said that’Buddhism describes up to 1000 x10 ^99 (!!!) world systems, Sata-Sahashri-Loka-datu. Lastly there is mention of the Brahmas’ ‘range of governance’,as I would put it, throughout those various ‘world systems’.
Now what I mean by all this is that if a deva or brahma or a Buddha can appear anywhere ‘within the time it takes to stretch our an arm’, what is to exclude a Buddha from appearing on a planet in any one of these ‘systems’, even when another Buddha is there,when devas and brahmas are recorded to have done it ? Distance is no barrier; a mile, an Astronomical Unit,a Light Year or a trillion Light Milleniums away makes no difference.
-“Then there is the issue of there being other Buddhas present at that assembly too. And they all seem to be “at the same level”-
Of course, the Mahāyāna logic is that if a Buddha CAN do it, then there is no reason why he shouldn’t…so it is alright to claim that He actually does so. But, of course, two contemporary Buddhas on the same planet are not necessary,so it does not happen. And ‘if they are all at the same level’ no one Buddha can gain anything from any Other, precisely because all Buddhas are of necessity at one and the same level.
y not
Immanus:
Thank you. However, as far as my being wise goes, it is very much an overstatement, if not altogether a misconception. I was just recounting an experience of mine that may be connected to your question.
You will do well though to examine well and follow as best as you are able to what Lal says; the key points he enumerates are condensed ( as is most often the case with his other answers), but MOREOVER the primary objective is always towards the elimination of suffering, rather than merely supplying an answer to a question.
May you progress on the Path
y not
Immanus:
As Lal keeps on repeating, going deep into these things is not profitable in itself. It is like trying to get all the details about the destination and to not set out on the journey. If you want to attain a deva bhava or a brahma bhava or Nibbana itself, then set out on the Path, even if you have only a glimpse of the destination. That will be enough. Kamma (PS)will see to it anyway.
It is alright to have an idea of other realms (if it were otherewise the Buddha would have made no reference to them; indeed, the workings of kamma necessitate their existence).
- ‘For a being born spontaneously, how do they conceptualize mother and father? Are there any equivalents to mother and father with opapatika births?’ –
From an early age I used to think that there must be some ‘place’ or ‘world’ where offspring are ‘born’ by methods other than by such coarse and messy ones like sexual intercourse.I had this idea that the combined ‘will’ of a couple at once brings about an offspring, you could say, as if by magic, and that the ‘charachter’ of the new-arrival is in essence the combined qualities of the’couple’, who ‘attract’ the newly-‘born’ by the intensity of the harmony with one another.
So from the very start the notion of opapatika birth did not in the least stike me as an ‘alien’ one when I first came across it in Buddhadhamma. I am not saying that the conditions there are like I imagined them – not in the least. It is just that I now realize that there could be more to it than ‘just my imagination’ – which, especially in the West, stands almost always for unreality and illusion.
y not
Johnny:
Also, on page 39, in relation to the deva realms, it is said:
-‘..Thus there is no possibility of doing good or practicing the dhamma….and not having accumulated further merits..they are sure to descend to the four woeful states’
The Buddha mentioned instances where so-and-so had ascended to such-and-such deva (or brahma) realm and ‘will obtain release from there’
Had it said ‘there is little possibility’ instead of ‘no possibility’ would be more like it, as I see, for those without any magga phala. But further, those who are born there as Sotapannas or higher will have ‘great possibility’, if not the inevitability, to pracice the Dhamma and obtain release from there( as per the Budddha, as I see)
y not
Thank you Lal:
It is the fear. The fear that one may end up in a bad realm despite
all one’s present efforts to the contrary. Unless, of course, one has attained the Sotapanna or higher stage. But as to that I know nothing either.As far as I can see, all that one can do is to constantly re-enforce one’s good gathi (by staying away from akusala, observing the precepts,mindfulness, doing Metta Bhavana, Pattidana, and dana of any type), thus re-enforcing those kamma with good vipaka.
What else can be done?
again, I thank you
y not
Lal:
- “at the cuti-patisandhi moment, many strong kamma vipaka from the past come to the mind, and one is selected BASED ON THE STATE OF THE MIND AT THAT MOMENT” –
How great is the danger here of a bad kamma vipaka coming to the fore at that moment even when one’s attention during life, and especially throughout the last years of that life, had been directed to contemplation on sanna(pl.)leading to good kamma vipaka?
From what I understand from the posts ‘the cow at the front of the queue at the gate’ will ‘present itself’ first, and one will grasp that. But what are the chances that a bad kamma vipaka from the past all of a sudden ‘jumps the queue’, as it were, and ousts the one at the gate?If that happens, will one automatically NOT grasp that?..and waits until the one originally at the front again, or another good kamma vipaka, presents itself?
Ever so grateful
y not
Aniduan:
I understand your difficulty. Belief is a big thing to do because what if you are fooling yourself by believing, and others are fooling you? There are so many of them. Which one, if any, is based on truth, even if in part?
My view is that precisely because of ‘the mundane and boring lives that we go through’, the sense of poetic justice, of the rule of right over wrong and that everything ‘falls into order’IN THE LONG RUN in the most perfect way possible demands that Existence must of necessity have the workings in place for all that to come about,whether we are aware of it or not. To me personally, it cannot be otherwise. Since coming across Buddhadhamma I see that that corresponds there in one sense to Atta.
The 31 realms give the opportunity or place for all that to transpire. Of course, for a materialist with the mentality that this short life is all there is so ‘make the best of it and enjoy’, all that is a dreamer’s dream. But I am not urging you to believe, not even Buddhadhamma. Go a bit into it and see for yourself:
-‘If I know someone who has developed the powers to see these worlds then I can believe it. But I don’t know anyone like that.’- :
One is claimed to have SEEN Reality in its totality around 2,500 years ago. After about 500 years of oral tradition, the Teaching was put into writing. The doubt arises whether what was written was what the Buddha had actually said, and for that one will have to go into it deeper to see whether IT ALL MAKES SENSE. Because Reality MUST make sense. If I am ‘guilty’ of one belief, that would be it, but, again, ‘make sense’ in the long run, seeing that it does NOT make sense that a being’s life spans just 80 years or so in all eternity and on one planet among an infinite number of them in all infinity.
The one realm of the 31 I had difficulty with was that of the niraya, and then again, not so much the existence of niraya per se but the conditions there, the sheer intensity and duration of the suffering there, both of which I saw as grossly disproportionate to the causes that lead there. Lal later gave the reason for that as well.
Tho only advice I feel confident to give is to keep reading about these 31 realms and see what your mind will come to make of it as time goes by. Of course, you can never force your mind to accept anything, and you should not try either.
y not
It is all a matter of conditioning.
One is influenced emotionally and psychologically by whatever envirnonment one grows up in. Moreover, the tenets and creeds particular to any belief system are handed down to you by those who love you and have your well-being at heart: teachers, mentors, and parents more than anyone else. ‘What? MY parents would teach me something untrue? They love me’ But they themselves are ‘victims’ of that conditioning.
That is how people become Christian, Hindus, Buddhists. I say ‘become’, because at birth one is not anything. All is handed down to you, sometimes even forced upon you by threats of hell fires, excomunication etc. (My reply to that has always been: If I am not communicated in the first place, how will anyone be able to EXcomunicate me?
I saw this at a very early age. Of course, I was labelled a black sheep, a stranger, an alien even. I would take nothing on blind belief or on external authority. Why should it be that I just happened to be born in that part of the world where they ‘have the truth’? (All those beyond are doomed, poor fellows) To my mind, they are very few indeed who are willing to leave the ‘security zone of the greatest number all around’ to go on a search of their own in the quest of Truth or Reality – how things really are. But there is no quest that is more noble and more worthwhile in the long run – and yes, also the hardest.
y not
1 user thanked author for this post.
Thank you Lal:
The whole exercise in itself is pointless, yes.
I sensed that ‘we cannot say even intercourse plays any role in births there’.that is why I added, ‘intercourse (in the widest and most’innocent’sense of the word)of whatever nature it may be’.
It is that I am going through intense mental and emotional suffering that goes back many years, only now it looks like forewarning something all-determining, drastic, final. Am reminded of ‘tears amounting to more than the waters of the four great oceans’
I latched onto Tobias’s post to escape for a while. That is all. Excuse me for it.
ever grateful
y not
