Page 9 of 29

Re: "The Deathless" (amata)

Posted: Thu Mar 22, 2012 2:33 pm
by Spiny O'Norman
daverupa wrote:
Spiny O'Norman wrote:a straightforward understanding based on the way DO is described
"Do not say so, Ananda..."
I'm talking about the way DO is described in the suttas, where in the cessation mode there is cessation of death following the cessation of birth. Given this it is logical to conclude that amata, the Deathless, refers to Pari-nibbana.

Actually though, I can see some some ambiguity in the suttas extracts we've been looking at, and I can see that amata may well refer to both Nibbana and Pari-nibbana.

What I find interesting is the reluctance of some contributors to acknowledge the option that amata refers to Pari-nibbana.

Spiny

Re: "The Deathless" (amata)

Posted: Fri Mar 23, 2012 4:57 pm
by squarepeg
I feel asthough there is a tendonsey to take buddhist termonolgy out of the context of a living organism when pali terms act as a foundation for cultural concepts and wording. They are taken as entities, that is to say that a pali term, i feel, is seen as being created by the Buddha with a set amout of qualities, and then it becomes our goal to reason out a perspective or wording that is able to take into account all of these percieved inherient qualities that we feel the pali word rightly deserves.

With that being said, if one were to realize this deathless state, whitch the term "state" here is ment to take into account the presence of those who have not realized this amata and is purely ment to define amata by compairson to the mundane. Not to say that amata or nibbana has some sort of limitation from which a boarder can be constructed, but a "state" as defined by the limited perception of those un-realized beings, defined for the sake of us who relay on definition. In this case we become the boarder from which amata or nibbana is to be seen as limited, because to be seen as unlimited something has to be experienced in the 1st person, and the opposite is true that everything experienced in the 3rd person is to be seen as limited.

If one were to realize this deathless "state" while still alive, assuming that it is infinite, all subsequent 1st person, assuming a 1st person in the same way the term "state" is used, i.e. a 1st person that is infered by the experience of a 3rd person. All subsequent "infered" 1st person experience would by definition of infinite have to be defined by this moment of amata realization. Death or Parinibbana taking place after this realization would therefor fall under the influence of this deathless realization.

So in response to Spiny O'Norman: I think it would be safe for us definers to say that this amata would encompass, by means of a 3rd person infering a 1st person, both the attainment of Nibbana and all subsequent actions including the extinguishing of the life force at the moment of death or Pari-Nibbana.

Re: "The Deathless" (amata)

Posted: Fri Mar 23, 2012 5:28 pm
by tiltbillings
squarepeg wrote:. . . .
There is no "deathless state" unless you mean one is no longer reborn then no longer dies and if you mean that one is no longer characterized by the conditioning of greed, hatred, and delusion -- in other words one is nibbana-ized. And there is no point in calling it "deathless," given the confusion that such inartful translation leads to.

Re: "The Deathless" (amata)

Posted: Sat Mar 24, 2012 1:04 pm
by squarepeg
tiltbillings wrote:
squarepeg wrote:. . . .
There is no "deathless state" unless you mean one is no longer reborn then no longer dies and if you mean that one is no longer characterized by the conditioning of greed, hatred, and delusion -- in other words one is nibbana-ized. And there is no point in calling it "deathless," given the confusion that such inartful translation leads to.
I can see how "deathless" is a useless translation because to an observer the Buddha obviously died. To say that he was no longer reborn and no longer conditioned by greed, hatered, and delusion is too assume the position of an observer infering another is experiencing these things in the 1st person. But! Too try to force a 3rd person perspective into words that convay the direct experience of a 1st person, i feel, how ever artfull, is to beat the meaning out of these words. And i fear all that would be left in the end is a flacid collection of dogmatic adjectives. Like Hes an "awsome" god or a "gracefull" god or a "powerfull" god... exc. I think the Buddha knew we were experienceing his teachings in the 3rd person and took acount for this by trying to modivate us with his terminology. To try to beat these words into the 1st person is to take away their modivational power (as has happend with our christian termonilogy).

DEATHLESS!!! is powerfull! everyone is afraid of DEATH!!! we want to be with out DEATH!!! so we practice what our teacher says leads to the DEATHLESS!!! If you can give a more rational reason to reshape these words then to modivate people to meditate and practice the N8FP then ide love to hear it.

I fear something like this could end up happening to buddhism in the west:
"Let us call the men who make use of the idea the prophets have announced the priests. The prophets live their ideas. The priests administer them to the people who are attached to the idea. The idea has lost its vitality. It has become a formula. The priests declare that it is very important how the idea is formulated; naturally the formulation becomes always important after the experience is dead; how else could one control people by controlling their thoughts, unless there is the "correct" formulation? The priests use the idea to organize men, to control them through controling the proper expression of the idea, and when they have anesthetized man enough they declare that man is not capable of being awake and of directing his own life, and that they, the priests, act out of duty, or even compassion, when they fulfill the function of directing men who, if left to themselves, are afraid of freedom." - Erich Fromm "prophets and priests," from "On disobediece and other essays" seabury press / new york

Re: "The Deathless" (amata)

Posted: Sat Mar 24, 2012 4:48 pm
by kirk5a
"'I tell you, the ending of the mental fermentations depends on the first jhana.' Thus it has been said. In reference to what was it said? There is the case where a monk, secluded from sensuality, secluded from unskillful qualities, enters & remains in the first jhana: rapture & pleasure born of seclusion, accompanied by directed thought & evaluation. He regards whatever phenomena there that are connected with form, feeling, perception, fabrications, & consciousness, as inconstant, stressful, a disease, a cancer, an arrow, painful, an affliction, alien, a disintegration, an emptiness, not-self. He turns his mind away from those phenomena, and having done so, inclines his mind to the property of deathlessness: 'This is peace, this is exquisite — the resolution of all fabrications; the relinquishment of all acquisitions; the ending of craving; dispassion; cessation; Unbinding.'
http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka ... .than.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

the property of deathlessness = amatāya dhātuyā

Re: "The Deathless" (amata)

Posted: Sat Mar 24, 2012 11:39 pm
by retrofuturist
Greetings Kirk,

Nice find. I wonder what Tilt will make of it...

:juggling:

Metta,
Retro. :)

Re: "The Deathless" (amata)

Posted: Sat Mar 24, 2012 11:42 pm
by tiltbillings
kirk5a wrote:
"'I tell you, the ending of the mental fermentations depends on the first jhana.' Thus it has been said. In reference to what was it said? There is the case where a monk, secluded from sensuality, secluded from unskillful qualities, enters & remains in the first jhana: rapture & pleasure born of seclusion, accompanied by directed thought & evaluation. He regards whatever phenomena there that are connected with form, feeling, perception, fabrications, & consciousness, as inconstant, stressful, a disease, a cancer, an arrow, painful, an affliction, alien, a disintegration, an emptiness, not-self. He turns his mind away from those phenomena, and having done so, inclines his mind to the property of deathlessness: 'This is peace, this is exquisite — the resolution of all fabrications; the relinquishment of all acquisitions; the ending of craving; dispassion; cessation; Unbinding.'
http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka ... .than.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

the property of deathlessness = amatāya dhātuyā
First of all notice it is not "the Deathless," and secondly the word dhatu is a mine field. Care to actually walk through it?

Re: "The Deathless" (amata)

Posted: Sat Mar 24, 2012 11:58 pm
by kirk5a
tiltbillings wrote:First of all notice it is not "the Deathless," and secondly the word dhatu is a mine field. Care to actually walk through it?
Certainly. You first. :smile:

Re: "The Deathless" (amata)

Posted: Sun Mar 25, 2012 2:01 am
by tiltbillings
kirk5a wrote:
tiltbillings wrote:First of all notice it is not "the Deathless," and secondly the word dhatu is a mine field. Care to actually walk through it?
Certainly. You first. :smile:
No, no, no, no. You brought it up.

Re: "The Deathless" (amata)

Posted: Sun Mar 25, 2012 1:12 pm
by kirk5a
tiltbillings wrote:
kirk5a wrote:
tiltbillings wrote:First of all notice it is not "the Deathless," and secondly the word dhatu is a mine field. Care to actually walk through it?
Certainly. You first. :smile:
No, no, no, no. You brought it up.
I don't see the mine field that you do. Is there something problematic with "inclines his mind to the property [dhatu] of deathlessness" ?

Re: "The Deathless" (amata)

Posted: Sun Mar 25, 2012 1:41 pm
by Aloka
In the book "The Island - An anthology of the Buddha's teachings on Nibbana" by Ajahn Pasanno & Ajahn Amaro, Chapter 7 is called "Attending to the Deathless". The book is available in PDF or free by post from Forest Sangha Publications.


http://forestsanghapublications.org/vie ... 10&ref=vec


.

Re: "The Deathless" (amata)

Posted: Sun Mar 25, 2012 2:12 pm
by tiltbillings
kirk5a wrote: I don't see the mine field that you do. Is there something problematic with "inclines his mind to the property [dhatu] of deathlessness" ?
Well, as I said above in this thread someplace, "deathlessness" is better than "the Deathless" and certainly "deathless," though it is still fairly inartful.

Re: "The Deathless" (amata)

Posted: Sun Mar 25, 2012 2:16 pm
by kirk5a
tiltbillings wrote:Well, as I said above in this thread someplace, "deathlessness" is better than "the Deathless" and certainly "deathless," though it is still fairly inartful.
So would you translate that passage as "inclines his mind to the property of freedom from death" ? Or how? If it is still inartful, then what is the alternative? And since we're talking about "art" - what does the "art" of translation amount to?

Re: "The Deathless" (amata)

Posted: Sun Mar 25, 2012 2:19 pm
by kirk5a
Aloka wrote:In the book "The Island - An anthology of the Buddha's teachings on Nibbana" by Ajahn Pasanno & Ajahn Amaro, Chapter 7 is called "Attending to the Deathless". The book is available in PDF or free by post from Forest Sangha Publications.


http://forestsanghapublications.org/vie ... 10&ref=vec


.
Thanks for this. There is much there directly relevant to this discussion.

Re: "The Deathless" (amata)

Posted: Sun Mar 25, 2012 4:58 pm
by tiltbillings
Aloka wrote:In the book "The Island - An anthology of the Buddha's teachings on Nibbana" by Ajahn Pasanno & Ajahn Amaro, Chapter 7 is called "Attending to the Deathless". The book is available in PDF or free by post from Forest Sangha Publications.


http://forestsanghapublications.org/vie ... 10&ref=vec


.
And given the explanations they have to go through pretty much makes my point about using "the Deathless" as a translation.