Many lifetimes of paramita development needed to be aryan?

[retrofuturist]

Greetings bhante,

Capisco. Iguess there is a subtle dif betwixt cicular and cyclic.

In that context it would seem so... but luckily that's just by the by, and not really pertinent to the Dhamma.

It reminds me of the the philosophical questions the Buddha would not answer... and when pressed on them by Venerable Malunkyaputta, replied as follows..

Extracts from MN 63: Cula-Malunkyovada Sutta
http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka ... .than.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

"Malunkyaputta, did I ever say to you, 'Come, Malunkyaputta, live the holy life under me, and I will declare to you that 'The cosmos is eternal,' or 'The cosmos is not eternal,' or 'The cosmos is finite,' or 'The cosmos is infinite,' or 'The soul & the body are the same,' or 'The soul is one thing and the body another,' or 'After death a Tathagata exists,' or 'After death a Tathagata does not exist,' or 'After death a Tathagata both exists & does not exist,' or 'After death a Tathagata neither exists nor does not exist'?"

"No, lord."

.......

"It's just as if a man were wounded with an arrow thickly smeared with poison. His friends & companions, kinsmen & relatives would provide him with a surgeon, and the man would say, 'I won't have this arrow removed until I know whether the man who wounded me was a noble warrior, a priest, a merchant, or a worker.' He would say, 'I won't have this arrow removed until I know the given name & clan name of the man who wounded me... until I know whether he was tall, medium, or short... until I know whether he was dark, ruddy-brown, or golden-colored... until I know his home village, town, or city... until I know whether the bow with which I was wounded was a long bow or a crossbow... until I know whether the bowstring with which I was wounded was fiber, bamboo threads, sinew, hemp, or bark... until I know whether the shaft with which I was wounded was wild or cultivated... until I know whether the feathers of the shaft with which I was wounded were those of a vulture, a stork, a hawk, a peacock, or another bird... until I know whether the shaft with which I was wounded was bound with the sinew of an ox, a water buffalo, a langur, or a monkey.' He would say, 'I won't have this arrow removed until I know whether the shaft with which I was wounded was that of a common arrow, a curved arrow, a barbed, a calf-toothed, or an oleander arrow.' The man would die and those things would still remain unknown to him.

...

"And why are they undeclared by me? Because they are not connected with the goal, are not fundamental to the holy life. They do not lead to disenchantment, dispassion, cessation, calming, direct knowledge, self-awakening, Unbinding. That's why they are undeclared by me.

"And what is declared by me? 'This is stress,' is declared by me. 'This is the origination of stress,' is declared by me. 'This is the cessation of stress,' is declared by me. 'This is the path of practice leading to the cessation of stress,' is declared by me. And why are they declared by me? Because they are connected with the goal, are fundamental to the holy life. They lead to disenchantment, dispassion, cessation, calming, direct knowledge, self-awakening, Unbinding. That's why they are declared by me.

I found it quite liberating to know that I didn't need to know the answer to everything to become enlightened, and that Right View vs Wrong View only applied to that which was relevant to suffering and its cessation. It helps keep me focused.

Thank you as always for your contributions to this forum.

Metta,
Retro.

[vinasp]

Hi everyone,

Suppose that I were a Buddhist monk living about 500 years after the time of the Buddha. The Abhidhamma has developed a doctrine of 'momentariness', meaning at first, the shortest perceptible moment. But this then gets extended to 'micro-moments' of infinitesimal duration which are merely fanciful speculation.
This then leads to the idea that the 'lifetime' of a being is, in the ultimate sense, just one of these micro-moments. So there are millions of such 'lifetimes' in a single day. It follows from this that reaching enlightenment will require millions of 'lifetimes'. This is lifetimes understood in the ultimate sense.
Now, if I, as a monk, am 'initiated' into this ultimate meaning of 'lifetime', and I say to a worldling that "It takes millions of lifetimes to reach enlightenment", how is the worldling going to understand what I have said? The poor worldling has no alternative but to take 'lifetime' in the conventional sense.

So, here is the real question - have I lied to the worldling? Have I deceived him?

Best wishes, Vincent.

[pt1]

Hi retro, sure, I'll try to address some of the issues you raise just for the sake of argument

Accepting what is said here for the sake of argument, the problematic aspect of this becomes what the first Buddha did. If I recall, Gotama was the 7th (?) in the lineage of Buddhas, so the problem arises with "how did this all start?". Virgo suggested very early on in this topic that for the 1st Buddha, in the absence of a previous Buddha to hear/receive his aspiration, he would have to cultivate the paramis for longer again, to compensate for the lack of guidance and instruction... which raises the subsequent question relating to starting points, and that is, what paramis are or can be developed in the absence of the known Dhamma and when does the count start?

I think David and Jack already addressed this, no beginning to samsara, so I’d assume the same applies to Buddhas.

If paramis really are accumulated and are indestructable as has been posited in the other concurrent topic...

Yes, I was hoping to address this issue, but no time until now. My understanding is that it helps to think of paramis as dhammas, or if you like, mental factors/faculties. E.g. consider intention – it’s just a dhamma that arises and falls away based on conditions (other dhammas), and it’s arising and falling in turn condition other dhammas in the near or far future, depending on the interplay of other conditions. So, in conventional terms, intention (kamma) brings a result in the near or far future (vipaka).

Imo, it’s a similar deal with all the other mental factors and so with those that are also classed as paramis. E.g. wisdom (or panna cetasika) – my understanding is that when it arises (aside from being based on conditions, e.g. when hearing a dhamma talk from a friend), it also very soon falls away. And then the person again acts without wisdom, etc. But that very arising of wisdom has now conditioned arising of wisdom sometimes in the future when the conditions are right again. So, it’s not like once I accumulate a certain “level” of wisdom, it stays with me all the time and never falls away, like I’m wise all the time. Wisdom, just like any other mental factor has the characteristics of anatta, anicca and dukkha, so it can only arise when the conditions are right. I think that is the explanation why even the bodhisatta in his last life can make mistakes (ala self-mortification) or Angulimala killing people, despite their vast accumulations of wisdom, because at such moments wisdom simply doesn’t arise.

So, the idea I think is that the more often a particular mental factor arises (the more often it is “accumulated”), the more it is likely to arise in the future and at greater depth so to speak, though of course both would depend on conditions. And so at some point when the conditions are right, wisdom arises and it is of such depth that it breaks the fetters. E.g. like when Sariputta heard the first dhamma verse, it was a condition enough for wisdom to arise, and his prior accumulations of wisdom conditioned the “depth” of wisdom that arose, which was immediately of stream-entry level no less. I guess if his accumulations were not as vast, the depth wouldn’t have been as much either, and he wouldn’t have attained stream-entry, and if he had very little accumulations of wisdom like other sectarians, he might have just frowned at the verse, and so instead of wisdom arising there would have been aversion, or speculation, etc.

Anyway, this is kind of my rendering of how much I understand about the subject at the moment.

...won't there just be a point where all sentient beings will be enlightened, with or without the help of Buddhadhamma?

I think there’s a sutta that says that beings in samsara are innumerable, so I guess it’ll never happen that all beings will be enlightened.

It's late so I'll try to address the rest of your questions tomorrow.

Best wishes

[appicchato]

...no beginning to samsara...

No discernible beginning...

[retrofuturist]

Greetings pt1,

I think David and Jack already addressed this, no beginning to samsara, so I’d assume the same applies to Buddhas.

Firstly, it's worth bearing in mind that it's "no discernible beginning..." as pointed out by venerable Appicchato above. To that end, there is no conclusive answer from the Buddha given on whether there really is "no beginning" and he point blank refused to answer whether the cosmos was finite or infinite (see MN 63 quotation above). It may be worth reflecting on why this was so.

Secondly, I don't see though how you can make such an assumption with any conviction, without first defining your chosen conceptual model of time (as discussed above). If you take it as one-way or linear, rather than circular, then no matter even if it's infinite in length, there is still a time before, and a time after, for any given event or 'time slice'. So if you argue it is infinite (despite the Buddha refusing to do so), you are thereby assuming an infinite number of Buddhas. Alternatively, if you argue it's finite (which the Buddha also refused to do), then there has to be a t=0, and thus the first Buddha after that point was the first. It's not a problem that can be assumed away easily...



Whilst it's often necessary and practical to assume certain things in life, I believe it's best not to build one's basis of understanding of important matters on shaky grounds, lest an assumption be made too lightly, and the impending consequences of the assumption be unrecognised initially, and then go on to cause problems later. Can liberating Dhamma be based on untested assumptions?

I think this problem also applies to the seemingly harmless inclusion of paramitas into Theravada Buddhism. It might have seemed a good and noble thing to do at the time, and a way to elevate the tradition, but would it cause problems further down the pike? Were any inconsistencies introduced? 526 posts worth of intense discussion and conflicting views would suggest "yes". The more grandiose conceptualisations become, the more assumptions required to sustain them.

As you can see from my history of conceptual proliferation (now don't get me started on Economic theories, Marxism and such!), when I warn against it, it's more than just regurgitating some theory of papanca from the suttas, it's a warning firmly rooted in personal experience and said for the benefit of kalyana-mittas who might benefit from such cautionary words.

Now that I've detailed my personal experiences of papanca, maybe some friends might be interested to read what the Buddha had to say on the subject, with a quality introduction from Thanissaro Bhikkhu.

MN 18: Madhupindika Sutta
http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka ... .than.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Metta,
Retro.

[Alex123]

Hello all,


Re: time it takes for awakening.

In MN85 it says that one could under Buddha's instruction reach Arhatship in 12 hours. Note, the requirements do NOT posit an existence of aeons of accumulations.

Here the bhikkhu takes faith about the enlightnment of the Thus Gone One:That Blessed One is perfect, rightfully enlightened, endowed with knowledge and conduct, well gone, knows of the worlds, is the incomparable tamer of those to be tamed, Teacher of gods and men, enlightened and blessed. He has few ailments and few disorders, promoting a good digestive system, not too cold and not too hot. He is not crafty nor fraudulent, shows his real self to the Teacher or to the wise co-associates in the holy life. Abides with aroused effort, for the dispelling of demerit and the accumulation of merit. Becomes firm not giving up the yoke for things of merit. [1] Becomes wise endowed with the noble ones penetration of the rising and falling of the five holding masses, for the rightful destruction of unpleasantness.

A bhikkhu endowed with these five factors gaining the training from the Thus Gone One in the morning, for whatever cause sons of clansmen rightfully go forth homeless that highest end of the holy life, he here and now, knowing, realizing, will attain in the evening, or advised in the evening would realise the next morning.
http://metta.lk/tipitaka/2Sutta-Pitaka/ ... ra-e1.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Satipatthana sutta also says that one could achieve Arhatship in as little as 7 days.


Of course without the Buddha's personal guidance it could take longer... But 12 hours is a LONG way off from aeons of accumulations.... So today it may take years... But not aeons.

Best wishes,


Alex

[retrofuturist]

Greetings Alex,

Nice sutta quote, and welcome to Dhamma Wheel.

Metta,
Retro.

[Alex123]

Greetings Alex,

Nice sutta quote, and welcome to Dhamma Wheel.

Metta,
Retro.

Thank you Retro.

Another addition:


Citta changes so fast, that the Buddha was at loss to find a simile for how fast citta changes. Awakening is the matter of the mind, not the body (which changes slowly).

Some monks (Bahiya, Channa, Vakkhali, Godhika) have went from worldling to fully awakened arhats from split seconds to few minutes. This shows that theoretically Awakening can happen instantly, or at least very quickly if all the right causes converge. Buddha did say that he could train a person possessing 5 things to become an Arahant in 12 hours. MN85.

svākkhāto bhagavatā dhammo sandiṭṭhiko akāliko ehipassiko opaneyyiko paccattaṃ veditabbo viññūhī’ti

The Dhama is well proclaimed by the Exalted One, Can be realized here and now, not a matter of time, come and see , to be experienced by oneself, realizable by the wise

So the Dhamma is sandiṭṭhiko akāliko “visible here and now and is not a matter of time”. To say that it cannot produce results if properly done, is
insulting the Dhamma. The fault is with the practitioner, not the Dhamma. Rather than quickly crossing the lake by the means of the super powered motor boat that is already made, people just run along the shore, parallel to the goal, and don’t get anywhere no matter how hard they try. The fault is not with
distance, but with the aim or direction that one moves. Becoming awakened is not like digging a mountain to see the view that it obstructs. It is more like
turning to the other side or looking from a different direction without the mountain spoiling the scenery.


“"I don't envision a single thing that is as quick to reverse itself as the mind — so much so that there is no feasible simile for how quick to reverse
itself it is."” - AN 1.48 http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka ... .than.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Thus theoretically an "unawakened" mind could make a u-turn instanteneously, in theory, at least.



Ven. Channa’s story:
http://metta.lk/tipitaka/2Sutta-Pitaka/ ... channovada" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;\
-e.html

SN 4.23 (3) Godhika Sutta.
SN 22.87 (5) Vakkali Sutta.

Bahiya story:
Udana 1.10 http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka ... .than.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;



With metta,


Alex

[pt1]

Hi retro and Venerable,

...no beginning to samsara...

No discernible beginning...

Yes, thanks for correcting my mistake, should have been a little more careful. My thinking on that topic is pretty much in line with what David said about it. Truth be told, I was hoping to skip the topic as quick as possible as it really seems to have little to do with one's practice in the present moment, i.e. we can only speculate about it.

part 2 - addressing your other questions retro:

What role would the aspiration play then? What is the unique significance of the Dhamma as a means to liberation then? Is it possible to be enlightened without any formal aspiration? If sentient beings have been wandering in samsara since literal beginningless time, why haven't we accidentally developed the paramis required for stream-entry?

So far, my understanding is that savakas can only develop wisdom/insight to the level of stream-entry level and higher if they are in contact with dhamma teachings - i.e. they are born during a Buddha sasana. If they are born outside of a sasana, then they can develop all paramis (wholesome mental factors) but their wisdom won’t reach stream-entry (or higher) – I presume because there won’t be enough conditions outside of a sasana to enable sufficient arising of panna. Only pacceka and sammasambuddhas can accomplish this outside of a sasana, I presume because their prior accumulations of panna and other wholesome mental factors are so vast that that is a condition enough for arising of wisdom of the level that breaks the fetters.

Regarding aspirations, as mentioned, I don’t really have any definite info for ordinary disciples at the moment, but my guess is that aspiration is in all cases a very “spontaneous affair” so to speak. E.g. I skimmed through the same book again, and it seems to happen that one person just sees a great disciple and wishes something to the effect of being like that in the time of some future Buddha. Even the story of Sumedha is similar. So, my guess is that in case of ordinary disciples, aspiration is also really just a very natural sincere wish to end suffering. Whether it happens that the person simply sees an “ordinary” monk who has found release and then wishes the same, or he just comes into contact with dhamma and wishes to end the differing, I don’t think it really matters. I mean, in essence, imo, the moment one is interested in dhamma, s/he’s already on the way at that moment so to speak.

Gotta rush now, so will address your last points a bit later.

Best wishes

[Alex123]

Hello Christopher, all,

Do we have any discussions going about how best to develop the paramitas most successfully in this lifetime. I'd be much more interested in reading about that.

To develop good quality one must have right view. How does one achieve right view?

Then a certain bhikkhu approached the Blessed One … and said to him: “Venerable sir, how should one know, how should one see, for wrong view to be abandoned?

Bhikkhu, when one knows and sees the eye as impermanent, wrong view is abandoned. When one knows and sees forms as impermanent … eye-consciousness as impermanent … eye-contact as impermanent … whatever feeling arises with mind-contact as condition … as impermanent, wrong view is abandoned. It is when one knows and sees thus that wrong view is abandoned."
SN35.165 (10) Abandoning Wrong View

Same for abandoning of self view SN35.166-167

Abandoning of wrong views doesn't require the "a whole bunch of books" approach. A thorough anicca meditation (in Goenka course, for example) can do that.

Ignorance needs to be abandoned. And how? By knowing and seeing faculties as impermanent

"Ignorance, bhikkhu, is that one thing through the abandoning of which ignorance is abandoned by a bhikkhu and true knowledge arises.
Bhikkhu, when a bhikkhu knows and sees the eye as impermanent, ignorance is abandoned by him and true knowledge arises. When he knows and sees forms as impermanent. When he knows and sees as impermanent whatever feeling arises with mind-contact as condition … ignorance is abandoned by him and true knowledge arises." - SN35.79(6) BB translation.

Same is said in SN 35. 54(2) Abandoning the Fetters


With abandoned ignorance, abandoned self views, without wrong views - then one could really develop the paramitas. Infact, IMHO, they would be a natural
behaviour of an aryan. Again, in theory one doesn't have to spend aeons to know and see that 6 bases, 6 sense objects, 6 sense consciousness, 6 sense contacts and 6 sense feelings are inconstant.


Best wishes,

Alex

[Annapurna]

Hello all,


Re: time it takes for awakening.

In MN85 it says that one could under Buddha's instruction reach Arhatship in 12 hours. Note, the requirements do NOT posit an existence of aeons of accumulations.

Here the bhikkhu takes faith about the enlightnment of the Thus Gone One:That Blessed One is perfect, rightfully enlightened, endowed with knowledge and conduct, well gone, knows of the worlds, is the incomparable tamer of those to be tamed, Teacher of gods and men, enlightened and blessed. He has few ailments and few disorders, promoting a good digestive system, not too cold and not too hot. He is not crafty nor fraudulent, shows his real self to the Teacher or to the wise co-associates in the holy life. Abides with aroused effort, for the dispelling of demerit and the accumulation of merit. Becomes firm not giving up the yoke for things of merit. [1] Becomes wise endowed with the noble ones penetration of the rising and falling of the five holding masses, for the rightful destruction of unpleasantness.

A bhikkhu endowed with these five factors gaining the training from the Thus Gone One in the morning, for whatever cause sons of clansmen rightfully go forth homeless that highest end of the holy life, he here and now, knowing, realizing, will attain in the evening, or advised in the evening would realise the next morning.
http://metta.lk/tipitaka/2Sutta-Pitaka/ ... ra-e1.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Satipatthana sutta also says that one could achieve Arhatship in as little as 7 days.


Of course without the Buddha's personal guidance it could take longer... But 12 hours is a LONG way off from aeons of accumulations.... So today it may take years... But not aeons.

Best wishes,


Alex

Hi, Alex,

the Buddha explained that some people grasp the complete Dhamma in a short time, when explained by the Buddha, some grasp large parts of it, and it takes a bit longer, and some don't ever really understand the Dhamma in this life, but have faith, and grasp it in future lives.

I don't remember where I read it, but I'm sure if there is doubt, one of our very well read folks here have heard of it and can give us all the source.

Btw, the fact that somebody grasps it quickly in this life could mean he has practiced through many previous lives, whilst the one who doesn't get it to a lesser amount.

Of course without the Buddha's personal guidance it could take longer... But 12 hours is a LONG way off from aeons of accumulations.... So today it may take years... But not aeons.

I wouldn't underestimate a Supreme Buddha's ability to teach them all. If it were so easy to pick up each disciple where s-he is at, we wouldn't need any Supreme ones.

metta

anna

[pt1]

Hi retro,

part 3 - answering to the last bits of your post:

...it's hard to see how one could ever hope validate it for themselves, here-and-now, and I'm sure that no one here is arguing from the position that they themselves know this parami argument to be true from personal experience.

Well, I might be wrong, but validating seems pretty straightforward to me. I mean compare your experiences to Venerable Sariputta for example. When I hear a dhamma verse, sometimes awareness arises in response, but usually it's just speculation, sometimes dullness, sometimes even aversion. So, while I'm glad there's seemingly a bit of wisdom developed, there's obviously not much of it either. Or take metta for example, I think many monks in the suttas were advised to extend unlimited metta. For me though, metta arises rarely, and I don't think it even extends beyond my room, so far, far, from being unlimited. Or what's to say about determination, etc... So my situation seems pretty straightforward. If one wants to be sure though, then I guess developing the fourth jhana and recollection of previous abodes (lives) should give an accurate picture of what was done previously. Though, to be honest, I don't think that really matters - what matters is the present moment, is there awareness or not, etc.

I myself, find it difficult to commit to any spiritual practice which is not sufficiently verifiable here-and-now on account of the consequences I see in other religionists who rely exclusively on blind faith and their preacher's interpretation of scripture. If, when I was a complete newbie, someone exposed this parami scheme to me as "this is how Buddhism works" I probably would have run for the hills.

I think I understand your concerns. Initially I was pretty hostile towards the whole idea of development requiring a really long time, but now, it seems reasonable and makes the message in the suttas even more acute – I mean, the urgency and “Come and see for yourself” are even more apparent now. I mean, if before I thought “Yeah, yeah, if I don’t make it in this life, I’ll make it in the next, no rush”, now it becomes apparent that one moment with bad intention can lead to aeons of missing a birth in a Buddha sasana, so the importance of being aware and mindful is much greater, because the stakes are now much, much greater.

I mean the whole practice seems to be in the present moment – if awareness arises, then in commentarial terms, that would mean that the parami (or mental factor) of wisdom is accumulating at that moment. So, it’s not like something additional needs to be done to accumulate it. If metta arises, then that parami is accumulating at that moment. And so on with all the other paramis, mental factors, etc. So it doesn’t seem different to what the suttas and abhidhamma are saying, just a bit different way of expressing it.

Re some other things that were raised in this discussion, I have to say that most of the opinions you and others expressed in this thread against commentarial positions are really opinions that I shared a couple of years ago before starting to read commentaries (and abhidhamma). Currently, I still don’t really see any conflicts between commentaries and tipitaka. Of course, there are some points that I am unable to understand at the moment, but so far, it seems the purpose of the commentaries is to help with understanding the present moment better – what dhamma(s) are arising, are they wholesome or not, etc – i.e. insight.

I mean, even very mundane-sounding stories about past lives of Theras and Theris can be very inspirational and help awareness and other wholesome mental factors arise in the present moment, encourage urgency, determination, etc. So, I think it all depends on the approach. I mean, even the suttas can be approached in a wrong way and lead to mere speculation rather than developing awareness, so it’s the same deal with the commentaries I feel.

Best wishes

[meindzai]

My response in the case of the paramitas, according to the four nikayas, these virtues are praiseworthy, to be developed, but no where is it said that one must neccessarily develop these 10 paramitas for a period of many lifetimes, let alone such an unfathomable period as 100,000 aeons. Furthermore, we must remember that the Dhamma is Well-expounded by the Blessed One. That means that everything the Buddha knew was necessary for reaching Nibbana, he proclaimed. It might pay to also remember that The Buddha was omnicscient with regards to the nature of samsara, if 100,000 aeons of parami development was necessary in order to attain the goal, or momentariness was in fact a doctrine of the Dhamma, I am absolutely sure the Buddha would have taught it in the four nikayas. However, the fact that such a declaration is absent from the Buddha's words, is a clear indication that such ideas are not the word of the Buddha.

Thank you so very much for putting into words what's been going through my head as I've read this. (Though I was not clear enough to express it so well.)

Excluding using the commentaries and Abhidhamma as source material, the argument that's been made on the side of the paramis has been through inference, as far as I can tell. That's actually ok up to a point. We can certainly infer that the paramis are a good thing, that they are praiseworthy, etc. But if it was absolutely vital for awakening then you'd think the Buddha would have mentioned it.

-M

[BlackBird]

Furthermore, this idea that it is impossible to attain arahantship during this 'phase' of the Buddha-sasana' but that it's still possible to attain ariyan states, which was stated in a post in this thread which has subsequently been deleted, has one striking logical flaw.

Using this system we must come to the conclusion that if it is possible to attain to once returner, then at the break up of the body, that once-returner must be reborn as a human who's only possible outcome is to achieve arahantship. That means that if there are once-returners in this world, there must be arahants. It must also follow that if it is possible to attain stream-entry, then it is entirely plausible that those who attained to stream-entry in previous life times have been reborn into this world during our time and are capable of attaining arahantship.

metta
Jack

[DNS]

Hi Jack,

That one returning life could be in a deva realm, where lifespans can be one million years or more.

However, I agree with you and also feel that all four Noble states including Arahantship are available now just as before.

Now with the information age and internet, I think the Dhamma is in no danger of dying. I am sure it will one day, but not in our [current] lifetimes.