Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
They are a bit too long Aniduan.
4 hours or so. Only since there can be no attendance because of CV-19 has that come down to 2 hours or so. Even so he is too long-winded at times, giving more examples than would appear necessary to get a point across. But that may also be due to his concern and compassion for his listeners, live or online; he can possibly have only a very vague idea of the mental capacity of each, and none at all of any stage of magga phala attained, so he must assume that none has. Besides the diversions.
Still, they are the best I have come across.
I am glad that you have come to see that ‘they are really good’.
may you progress on the Path.
Hello Aniduan,
Kāyānupassanā is one of the foundations of mindfulness.
Listen again starting from 30’10”: ‘The reason we are doing this meditation is to discover where is the self; the self that we have so got used to’ (33’17”). During the course of that time he also makes it clear the aim of the meditation is with Nibbana as the goal, not merely as a means towards relaxation and a feeling of general well-being.
I have listened to quite a few of these sermons now several months. Not once did I find anything out of line with pure Dhamma.
Lal,
So you mean that the term anantariya kamma does not have to be qualified by ‘papa’; like ditthi by itself implies micca ditthi, is that it. I took it at face value,i.e. any anantariya kamma, good or bad.
Thanks
“The chance of one of these beings being born in the human kingdom is negligible, immensely less…”
Yes, Lvalio, but oetb starts off the other way around: “those who depart from the human realm..”
I wonder now which of the two is less likely! A human not taking birth in the apayas, or a being in the apayas attaining human birth?
I have done such calculations myself based on the Buddha’s analogies about the rarity of a human birth and the length of an aeon, for instance. The estimates come remarkably close to what we would call acceptable, even from the scientific point of view. I will not bother you with the math; the important take from all that is to be ever ‘awake to the fact’ that we are living a very rare moment indeed:
– The appearance of a Buddha is very rare. (In a mahakappa with 5 Buddhas like this one, the interval could well be as ‘short’ as a billion years. But in most mahakappas by far there are none; the latest two ‘voids’ have been of 30 and of 60 mahakappas.
– Being born human is VERY rare. (accurate estimates aside!)
– An Ariya teaching the Dhamma is very rare.
– One who listens to the Dhamma, understands it and strives to apply it is very rare.
– Feeling and expressing gratitude for that is very rare.
Now multiply the odds. A very rare MOMENT indeed.
What I meant was that without their knowing it, just considering the idea of a thousand-generation star comes closer(?) to Buddha’s model – because is ‘1000th-generation’ instead of ‘third-generation’ significantly closer to ‘infinitely-generating’?
Read ‘3-, at most 10- generation star’ and you have the model based on the Big Bang .Read infinite-generation star, and you have Buddha’s model.
I did not see that a hypothetical ‘1000th generation star’ does not fit in with science’s own Big Bang theory. Thanks Lal.
“In modern science, ALL star systems that CAN BE SEEN TODAY are supposed to have arisen in the Big Bang….. In modern science, ALL stars were created in a single “Big Bang.”
This is a bit out-dated, even in scientific circles. I myself had been under the impression that the view of science was that the Sun (for one star) is a second generation star. Now there are some who hold the view that it is a third-generation star; others that it could be a 1000th generation star!!
Buddha’s ‘version’ on the way to being proved correct! As will be the case over and over again with other theories even in other fields of enquiry.
I tried to post this about 3 hours ago but for some odd ‘hesitation’ with the Site, it did not go through. I am trying again now ( I kept a copy):
Hello there Lucas,
I take “many eons of cosmic contraction, many eons of cosmic expansion” as an indication of the time that has elapsed, the time it took for the bhikkhu to go through all those lives – that is, in aeon after aeon, not in just one.
As to your last para, I too see that ‘transferring’ to another planetary system should be no problem for the mind. Say one still needs experience from a human world, but he does not ‘fit in’anymore with the state of that humanity at that time. But this is not connected with the destruction of any planet in any way. It may also happen the other way around. There would be some here who are ‘not of this planet’. The Buddha SAW the inevitable transference to higher realms only following the destruction of the planet.
“The big picture” is that these supernovae take place in galaxies with regular frequency, that is clear.. AND also that certain stars can expand into red giants and destroy the inner planets, before a supernova explodes ‘nearby’
Of immediate concern to us is this one particular star, the Sun. When the Sun reaches the red giant phase, the Earth will be destroyed THEREBY alone not by the supernova (if the supernova explosion had not taken place by then.) This is what I meant.
Destruction will take place one way or another,that is the ‘big picture’
Thank you.
One thing seems not accounted for in the Buddha’s (i.e.the real) model.
Stars not massive enough to go supernova, like the Sun, will expand into red giants, engulfing and destroying the nearer planets including Earth (in the case of the Solar system) before shrinking back to white dwarfs. If an inhabited planet lies within that radius, the destruction will happen before the explosion of a supernova in the vicinity. The star’s time ‘is up’ before that of the supernova.
I have for long pondered in how literal a sense the term ‘10,000’ world-system’ should be taken. Some say it may even refer to a Galaxy. I do not see that as a possibility, as 10,000 is a far cry from 200 billion (I would say the number is closer to 1000 billion, i.e. one trillion), and the Buddha would surely have used a different number, even if in a figurative sense. (The Buddha’s similes about how long an aeon is and the chances of being born human, for instance – the turtle and the yoke, the sand grains on His fingernail – are very factual: taking the trouble to do some calculation will confirm it). And globular clusters do not fit the bill on other considerations.
Now it is estimated that a supernova’s ‘kill zone’ lies in the space within 26 light years of the outburst. I have made some calculations: given the density of stars in our vicinity of the Galaxy, within that space (about 73,600 cubic light years) there would be only about 330 stars. But those are stars in the 4% universe! If the remaining mass of 96% were taken into account, the number would rise to 8,250 !! Of course, those ‘unseen’ stars, and, by extension, planets, would be fine-material (better than the scientific because poetic ‘dark’).
I am not saying that is how matter stands in actual fact, to be sure. I am only trying correlate the term ‘10,000 world-system’ with the latest scientific ‘facts’. I would very much appreciate the input of others.
It’s nothing, Lair. Don’t mention it.
I gave that sequence only just to ‘fill the gap’ until Lal provides the direct link that works, having been alerted by yourself that his first did not. Which in fact he did.
In ‘Pancupādānakkhandha – It is All Mental” 3: “We can translate the term, pancupādānakkhandha, as “five clinging aggregates”.
This may be taken to mean (relying on grammar alone) that it is the aggregates themselves that are responsible for the clinging, that ‘do’ the clinging Which of course is not the case. It is the being who is responsible for clinging to the five aggregates, so why is it not called instead : pancakkhandhaupadana?
Yes, Lang, the way you put that, it cannot be disputed. Yet, there is always and everywhere attachment. “this world of 31 realms” is the field where the 4 Noble Truths and Tilakkhana operate, that is, everywhere in existence. And what is the first Noble truth?
Starting with anicca: we pursue that which we like, thinking it will bring happiness. Then we attach. That is where the suffering comes, when we discover it does not. Unless we see this we are helpless to prevent the sequence, and even then, it will not be easy to eliminate.
There are may posts on this. I am here only drawing on my own experience, but the substance underlying all that is in the posts.
May you attain eternal Bliss.
I do not see how that can be so.
An Arahant still experiences the khandhas – indeed, he needs contact with them in order to survive in the body – yet he generates no attachment. Therefore no dukkha.
But for all the rest, for you and me, it is precisely that ‘..upadana’ part that is the cause of the ‘..dukkha’.
Never mind Lal.
I could go on .. so in the case of the brahmin and his wife, are you saying that they TRIED TO RECALL the Buddha having been their son ? !! The sutta suggests the recognition ‘hit them’ on seeing the Buddha. “…met him in the gateway. Falling at the Buddha’s feet, and clasping him by the ankles.. Then came the brahmin’s wife, and she too fell at the feet of the Blessed One, crying, “My son..
Let us wait for those posts.
Infinitely Grateful
Thank you Lal,
“When we need to recall the memory…” But exactly WHAT triggers the memory, what prompts that need, what it is ABOUT the other person (in the example I gave) that triggers the recall, that causes the transmitter to sense the need to send a signal to the nama loka – since the body is different. A case in point: the reference I made elsewhere of that brahmin and his wife who recognized the Buddha as their ‘son’.
Or – it is ‘in the nature of things’ (Dhammata) that in such instances the initial trigger happens. Connection ever registered in nama loka, condition arising, signal to the brain, transfer to hadaya vatthu, onto vinnana (and awareness of the fact). In this way, neither the senses, nor the faculties give rise to the ‘recognition’.
As to the rest of it, all is clear.
I look forward to the upcoming posts. Please do not bother answering here. It is not meant as a question, just sharing my thought sequence as it arose, especially the second para.
May you attain eternal Bliss soon.
