Do arahants discard vipaka/suffering?

A discussion on all aspects of Theravāda Buddhism

Re: Do arahants discard vipaka/suffering?

Postby Sylvester » Thu Apr 07, 2011 9:12 am

retrofuturist wrote:Greetings Piotr,
piotr wrote:Hi Retrofuturist,

retrofuturist wrote:Even if one could take the leap and say it was inferred, one could also take the leap and say that it was inferred that this example pertains to nama-rupa, salayatana, phassa and vedana... therefore still being a representation of the dependent origination relationship.


Could you rephrase it? I can't understand your point here.

OK.

I don't see SN 35.237 as a complete form of the idappaccayata principle, because these crucial elements are omitted: "From the arising of this, that arises... From the ceasing of this, that ceases."

Despite that, I do think that SN 35.237 actually is about dependent origination, and that it covers the nidanas from nama-rupa through to vedana.

Because of a combination of both of those factors, it doesn't adequately satisfy the challenge I laid out for Tilt.

Does that make sense?

Metta,
Retro. :)


Hi retro

Hmm, it looks to my untrained eye that -

Hatthesu, sati ādānanikkhepanaṃ hoti; (...) Hatthesu, asati ādānanikkhepanaṃ na hoti


is formulated in the standard -

imasmim sati, idam hoti ... Imasmim asati, idam na hoti
.

The "this/that" formulation is general and the appropriate dhammas can be used to populate the "this/that".
Sylvester
 
Posts: 1569
Joined: Tue Mar 10, 2009 9:57 am

Re: Do arahants discard vipaka/suffering?

Postby cooran » Thu Apr 07, 2011 9:13 am

tiltbillings wrote:
cooran wrote:Especially for Tilt :console:

Definition of WALLAH
: a person who is associated with a particular work or who performs a specific duty or service —usually used in combination <the book wallah was an itinerant peddler — George Orwell>
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/wallah

with much metta and karuna,
Chris

I got severely abused here a while ago for referring to the jhanikas as jhana-wallahs, though I would also refer to the vipassanikas as vipassana-wallahs. To me it is a harmless, if not an amusing, word. I rather like it.



Good Heavens! :jawdrop:

We're in good company tilt..... :tongue:

I started the rot on this forum way back in 2009 talking about the Dhobi-wallah (official name of hotel laundryman) in India:
viewtopic.php?f=22&t=1238&p=15489
And then Ven. Dhammanando ‘’transgressed’’ here in 2009 in the <gasp> Abhidhamma sub-forum speaking about a jhana-wallah also:
viewtopic.php?f=18&t=1539&p=19930&hilit=wallah#p19930

How naughty of us …..

With metta
Chris
---The trouble is that you think you have time---
---Worry is the Interest, paid in advance, on a debt you may never owe---
---It's not what happens to you in life that is important ~ it's what you do with it ---
User avatar
cooran
 
Posts: 7756
Joined: Tue Jan 06, 2009 11:32 pm
Location: Queensland, Australia

Re: Do arahants discard vipaka/suffering?

Postby Nyana » Thu Apr 07, 2011 9:19 am

Sylvester wrote:I would offer a slightly different take on the anumiyati in SN 22.36. I suspect the "measuring" needs to be understood in the context of absence of the anusayas with respect to the Aggregates. The anusayas only "anuseti" when the cetasika vedanas come into play, as a sequel to vedana. But the total absence of anusayas in an arahant does not logically entail the disappearance of the Aggregates.

Ven. Ñāṇananda gets it. The aggregate scheme is mere designation (paññattimatta). The classical Mahāvihāra two truth hermeneutic is deeply flawed -- resulting in either an eternalistic or nihilistic view. We also see variations on these extremes playing out all over this forum and amongst many Theravāda teachers as well. The aggregates are not to be taken as "the given." Nor is contact. With the elimination of passion, aggression, and delusion the mind is measureless (appamāṇacetasa). There is no criterion or measurement (pamāṇa) which can be used as a reference point to define a measureless cognition. SN 6.7 Kokālika Sutta:

    What wise man here would seek to define
    A measureless one by taking his measure?
    He who would measure a measureless one
    Must be, I think, an obstructed worldling.

In evocative terms, one who is awake is deep (gambhīra), boundless (appameyya), and fathomless (duppariyogāḷha) -- utterly free from any reference to specifically fabricated consciousness (viññāṇasaṅkhayavimutta). "Gone" (atthaṅgata), the measureless mind is not dependent (anissita) on any findable support, and therefore, is untraceable (ananuvejja) here and now. MN 22 Alagaddūpama Sutta:

    Monks, when the gods with Indra, with Brahmā and with Pajāpati seek a monk who is thus liberated in mind, they do not find [anything of which they could say], “The tathāgata’s consciousness is dependent on this.” Why is that? A tathāgata, I say, is untraceable even here and now.

Elsewhere this non-abiding mind is designated as "unestablished consciousness" (appatiṭṭha viññāṇa). Ven. Ñāṇananda gets it.

All the best,

Geoff
Nyana
 
Posts: 2227
Joined: Tue Apr 27, 2010 11:56 am

Re: Do arahants discard vipaka/suffering?

Postby retrofuturist » Thu Apr 07, 2011 9:23 am

Greetings Sylvester,
Sylvester wrote:The "this/that" formulation is general and the appropriate dhammas can be used to populate the "this/that".

You mean sankhata dhammas, yes? (i.e. excluding the unformed - nibbana).

Metta,
Retro. :)
If you have asked me of the origination of unease, then I shall explain it to you in accordance with my understanding:
Whatever various forms of unease there are in the world, They originate founded in encumbering accumulation. (Pārāyanavagga)


Exalted in mind, just open and clearly aware, the recluse trained in the ways of the sages:
One who is such, calmed and ever mindful, He has no sorrows! -- Udana IV, 7


Dharma Wheel (Mahayana / Vajrayana forum) -- Open flower ~ Open book (blog)
User avatar
retrofuturist
Site Admin
 
Posts: 14770
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 9:52 pm
Location: Melbourne, Australia

Re: Do arahants discard vipaka/suffering?

Postby tiltbillings » Thu Apr 07, 2011 9:35 am

Ñāṇa wrote:
Sylvester wrote:I would offer a slightly different take on the anumiyati in SN 22.36. I suspect the "measuring" needs to be understood in the context of absence of the anusayas with respect to the Aggregates. The anusayas only "anuseti" when the cetasika vedanas come into play, as a sequel to vedana. But the total absence of anusayas in an arahant does not logically entail the disappearance of the Aggregates.

Ven. Ñāṇananda gets it. The aggregate scheme is mere designation (paññattimatta). The classical Mahāvihāra two truth hermeneutic is deeply flawed -- resulting in either an eternalistic or nihilistic view. We also see variations on these extremes playing out all over this forum and amongst many Theravāda teachers as well. The aggregates are not to be taken as "the given." Nor is contact. With the elimination of passion, aggression, and delusion the mind is measureless (appamāṇacetasa). There is no criterion or measurement (pamāṇa) which can be used as a reference point to define a measureless cognition. SN 6.7 Kokālika Sutta:

    What wise man here would seek to define
    A measureless one by taking his measure?
    He who would measure a measureless one
    Must be, I think, an obstructed worldling.

In evocative terms, one who is awake is deep (gambhīra), boundless (appameyya), and fathomless (duppariyogāḷha) -- utterly free from any reference to specifically fabricated consciousness (viññāṇasaṅkhayavimutta). "Gone" (atthaṅgata), the measureless mind is not dependent (anissita) on any findable support, and therefore, is untraceable (ananuvejja) here and now. MN 22 Alagaddūpama Sutta:

    Monks, when the gods with Indra, with Brahmā and with Pajāpati seek a monk who is thus liberated in mind, they do not find [anything of which they could say], “The tathāgata’s consciousness is dependent on this.” Why is that? A tathāgata, I say, is untraceable even here and now.

Elsewhere this non-abiding mind is designated as "unestablished consciousness" (appatiṭṭha viññāṇa). Ven. Ñāṇananda gets it.

All the best,

Geoff
While all of that is true, it is an interesting question of how the arahant's mind functions in terms of the day-to-day kitchen sink stuff of life. When a ordinary person sees and recognizes another it is in these terms: Dependent on the eye and the forms, eye-consciousness arises; the coming-together of the three is sense-impression." Why for the arahant with the Nibbàna element with residual clinging be any different in the bare mechanics?
This being is bound to samsara, kamma is his means for going beyond.
SN I, 38.

Ar scáth a chéile a mhaireas na daoine.
People live in one another’s shelter.

"We eat cold eels and think distant thoughts." -- Jack Johnson
User avatar
tiltbillings
 
Posts: 19893
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2008 9:25 am

Re: Do arahants discard vipaka/suffering?

Postby Sylvester » Thu Apr 07, 2011 9:35 am

retrofuturist wrote:Greetings Sylvester,
Sylvester wrote:The "this/that" formulation is general and the appropriate dhammas can be used to populate the "this/that".

You mean sankhata dhammas, yes? (i.e. excluding the unformed - nibbana).

Metta,
Retro. :)



Whoops, not my intent, but now that you mention it, probably correct. When I spoke of "appropriate dhammas", I was thinking of those specific paccayas paired with their effect in a typical nidana.

I do have to confess that the example given by Piotr is not a standard DO nidana, which I think is your point.

I pray this does not lead to a thread with a cosmological bent that enquires on how pervasive DO is.
Sylvester
 
Posts: 1569
Joined: Tue Mar 10, 2009 9:57 am

Re: Do arahants discard vipaka/suffering?

Postby tiltbillings » Thu Apr 07, 2011 9:37 am

retrofuturist wrote:Because of a combination of both of those factors, it doesn't adequately satisfy the challenge I laid out for Tilt.
But as Sylvester has neatly shown, the challenge is not meaningful.
This being is bound to samsara, kamma is his means for going beyond.
SN I, 38.

Ar scáth a chéile a mhaireas na daoine.
People live in one another’s shelter.

"We eat cold eels and think distant thoughts." -- Jack Johnson
User avatar
tiltbillings
 
Posts: 19893
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2008 9:25 am

Re: Do arahants discard vipaka/suffering?

Postby Nyana » Thu Apr 07, 2011 9:53 am

tiltbillings wrote:Why for the arahant with the Nibbàna element with residual clinging be any different in the bare mechanics?

What bare mechanics? Phenomenological description? That's mere designation. Some of this issue has been touched upon here. In short:

    Sense-objects are therefore signs which have become significant in themselves owing to our ignorance that their significance depends on the psychological mainsprings of lust, hatred and delusion. This, in other words, is a result of reasoning from the wrong end (ayoniso manasikāra) which leads both the philosopher and the scientist alike into a topsy-turvydom of endless theorising.

Contact was also touched upon :tongue: here.

All the best,

Geoff
Nyana
 
Posts: 2227
Joined: Tue Apr 27, 2010 11:56 am

Re: Do arahants discard vipaka/suffering?

Postby acinteyyo » Thu Apr 07, 2011 9:56 am

Ñāṇa wrote:
Sylvester wrote:I would offer a slightly different take on the anumiyati in SN 22.36. I suspect the "measuring" needs to be understood in the context of absence of the anusayas with respect to the Aggregates. The anusayas only "anuseti" when the cetasika vedanas come into play, as a sequel to vedana. But the total absence of anusayas in an arahant does not logically entail the disappearance of the Aggregates.

Ven. Ñāṇananda gets it. The aggregate scheme is mere designation (paññattimatta). The classical Mahāvihāra two truth hermeneutic is deeply flawed -- resulting in either an eternalistic or nihilistic view. We also see variations on these extremes playing out all over this forum and amongst many Theravāda teachers as well. The aggregates are not to be taken as "the given." Nor is contact. With the elimination of passion, aggression, and delusion the mind is measureless (appamāṇacetasa). There is no criterion or measurement (pamāṇa) which can be used as a reference point to define a measureless cognition. SN 6.7 Kokālika Sutta:

    What wise man here would seek to define
    A measureless one by taking his measure?
    He who would measure a measureless one
    Must be, I think, an obstructed worldling.

In evocative terms, one who is awake is deep (gambhīra), boundless (appameyya), and fathomless (duppariyogāḷha) -- utterly free from any reference to specifically fabricated consciousness (viññāṇasaṅkhayavimutta). "Gone" (atthaṅgata), the measureless mind is not dependent (anissita) on any findable support, and therefore, is untraceable (ananuvejja) here and now. MN 22 Alagaddūpama Sutta:

    Monks, when the gods with Indra, with Brahmā and with Pajāpati seek a monk who is thus liberated in mind, they do not find [anything of which they could say], “The tathāgata’s consciousness is dependent on this.” Why is that? A tathāgata, I say, is untraceable even here and now.

Elsewhere this non-abiding mind is designated as "unestablished consciousness" (appatiṭṭha viññāṇa). Ven. Ñāṇananda gets it.

All the best,

Geoff

:goodpost: excellent post...
retrofuturist wrote:Thanks for an enjoyable and challenging discussion.

dito :anjali:
Pubbe cāhaṃ bhikkhave, etarahi ca dukkhañceva paññāpemi, dukkhassa ca nirodhaṃ. (M.22)
Api cāhaṃ, āvuso, imasmiṃyeva byāmamatte kaḷevare, sasaññimhi samanake lokañca paññāpemi lokasamudayañca lokanirodhañca lokanirodhagāminiñca paṭipadan. (AN4.45)

:anjali:
User avatar
acinteyyo
 
Posts: 1055
Joined: Mon Jun 01, 2009 9:48 am
Location: Neuburg/Donau, Germany

Re: Do arahants discard vipaka/suffering?

Postby tiltbillings » Thu Apr 07, 2011 10:07 am

Ñāṇa wrote:
tiltbillings wrote:Why for the arahant with the Nibbàna element with residual clinging be any different in the bare mechanics?

What bare mechanics? Phenomenological description? That's mere designation. Some of this issue has been touched upon here. In short:

    Sense-objects are therefore signs which have become significant in themselves owing to our ignorance that their significance depends on the psychological mainsprings of lust, hatred and delusion. This, in other words, is a result of reasoning from the wrong end (ayoniso manasikāra) which leads both the philosopher and the scientist alike into a topsy-turvydom of endless theorising.

Contact was also touched upon :tongue: here.

All the best,

Geoff
Mere designation? How does this or that happen? Ah, don't worry about it; it is mere designation; nothing to see here; move it along.

Well, it may be mere designation, but it is still something that can be talked about. Or at least the Buddha seemed to think so, otherwise we would not have the such designation as khandhas and the "all" put forth by the Buddha as ways of talking about such stuff, even if it is mere designation.
This being is bound to samsara, kamma is his means for going beyond.
SN I, 38.

Ar scáth a chéile a mhaireas na daoine.
People live in one another’s shelter.

"We eat cold eels and think distant thoughts." -- Jack Johnson
User avatar
tiltbillings
 
Posts: 19893
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2008 9:25 am

Re: Do arahants discard vipaka/suffering?

Postby piotr » Thu Apr 07, 2011 10:13 am

Hi Ñāṇa,

Ñāṇa wrote:
    Monks, when the gods with Indra, with Brahmā and with Pajāpati seek a monk who is thus liberated in mind, they do not find [anything of which they could say], “The tathāgata’s consciousness is dependent on this.” Why is that? A tathāgata, I say, is untraceable even here and now.

Elsewhere this non-abiding mind is designated as "unestablished consciousness" (appatiṭṭha viññāṇa). Ven. Ñāṇananda gets it.


On the other hand:

    'Monks, the body of the Tathagata stands with the link that bound it to becoming cut. As long as the body subsists, devas and humans will see him. But at the breaking-up of the body and the exhaustion of the life-span, devas and humans will see him no more. Monks, just as when the stalk of a bunch of mangoes has been cut, all the mangoes on it go with it, just so the Tathagata's link with becoming has been cut. As long as the body subsists, devas and humans will see him. But at the breaking-up of the body and the exhaustion of the life-span, devas and humans will see him no more.'

    Brahmajāla-sutta, DN 1 (translation by Maurice Walshe)

That's why we get confused, I guess.
Bhagavaṃmūlakā no, bhante, dhammā...
User avatar
piotr
 
Posts: 371
Joined: Sat Jan 17, 2009 4:33 pm
Location: Khettadesa

Re: Do arahants discard vipaka/suffering?

Postby tiltbillings » Thu Apr 07, 2011 10:26 am

piotr wrote:Hi Ñāṇa,

Ñāṇa wrote:
    Monks, when the gods with Indra, with Brahmā and with Pajāpati seek a monk who is thus liberated in mind, they do not find [anything of which they could say], “The tathāgata’s consciousness is dependent on this.” Why is that? A tathāgata, I say, is untraceable even here and now.

Elsewhere this non-abiding mind is designated as "unestablished consciousness" (appatiṭṭha viññāṇa). Ven. Ñāṇananda gets it.


On the other hand:

    'Monks, the body of the Tathagata stands with the link that bound it to becoming cut. As long as the body subsists, devas and humans will see him. But at the breaking-up of the body and the exhaustion of the life-span, devas and humans will see him no more. Monks, just as when the stalk of a bunch of mangoes has been cut, all the mangoes on it go with it, just so the Tathagata's link with becoming has been cut. As long as the body subsists, devas and humans will see him. But at the breaking-up of the body and the exhaustion of the life-span, devas and humans will see him no more.'

    Brahmajāla-sutta, DN 1 (translation by Maurice Walshe)

That's why we get confused, I guess.
The question is what is meant by the non-abiding mind/unestablished consciousness. Is this a reference to a particular experience, or is the consciousness of the arahant non-abiding all the time. It the latter is the case, what does that really mean in terms of the embodied arahant.

Also, interesting thing about this text is: the body of the Tathagata stands with the link that bound it to becoming cut, but it does not say is that the other links associated with the body are not operative. It seems to suggest that they still function as part of the body, and the body really cannot function without the other khandhas being in play, even if they are mere designations.
This being is bound to samsara, kamma is his means for going beyond.
SN I, 38.

Ar scáth a chéile a mhaireas na daoine.
People live in one another’s shelter.

"We eat cold eels and think distant thoughts." -- Jack Johnson
User avatar
tiltbillings
 
Posts: 19893
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2008 9:25 am

Re: Do arahants discard vipaka/suffering?

Postby Nyana » Thu Apr 07, 2011 10:35 am

tiltbillings wrote:Well, it may be mere designation, but it is still something that can be talked about. Or at least the Buddha seemed to think so, otherwise we would not have the such designation as khandhas and the "all" put forth by the Buddha as ways of talking about such stuff, even if it is mere designation.

The all is to be abandoned. The path is to be developed in order to abandon the all. The path is entirely 100% fabricated for that specific purpose. The raft is for crossing over, not for carrying around once crossed over, and certainly not for constructing philosophies.

All the best,

Geoff
Nyana
 
Posts: 2227
Joined: Tue Apr 27, 2010 11:56 am

Re: Do arahants discard vipaka/suffering?

Postby retrofuturist » Thu Apr 07, 2011 10:43 am

Greetings Tilt,

tiltbillings wrote:
retrofuturist wrote:Because of a combination of both of those factors, it doesn't adequately satisfy the challenge I laid out for Tilt.
But as Sylvester has neatly shown, the challenge is not meaningful.

No, but he has shown why it was impossible. 8-)

This is because dependent origination, as explained through the 12 nidanas, depicts the entirety of conditioned/samsaric existince, as defined by sabba (the all).

However, the nibbanic experience of an arahant is unconditioned (by greed, aversion and delusion) - it is asankhata dhamma (an unformed dhamma)

This is why I asked Sylvester to confirm he was talking about conditioned/formed (sankhata dhammas)... because that which is unconditioned (i.e. not dependent on anything) cannot possibly arise in dependence upon something.

Hence a statement like "... Paticcasamuppada, which is Dhamma, is what functions. Just not paticcasamuppada conditioned by ignorance" makes no sense whatsoever. How could the independent be dependently arisen?

Metta,
Retro. :)
If you have asked me of the origination of unease, then I shall explain it to you in accordance with my understanding:
Whatever various forms of unease there are in the world, They originate founded in encumbering accumulation. (Pārāyanavagga)


Exalted in mind, just open and clearly aware, the recluse trained in the ways of the sages:
One who is such, calmed and ever mindful, He has no sorrows! -- Udana IV, 7


Dharma Wheel (Mahayana / Vajrayana forum) -- Open flower ~ Open book (blog)
User avatar
retrofuturist
Site Admin
 
Posts: 14770
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 9:52 pm
Location: Melbourne, Australia

Re: Do arahants discard vipaka/suffering?

Postby Nyana » Thu Apr 07, 2011 10:46 am

tiltbillings wrote:The question is what is meant by the non-abiding mind/unestablished consciousness.

Well, I'll defer that question to the arahants. SN 6.7 Kokālika Sutta:

    What wise man here would seek to define
    A measureless one by taking his measure?
    He who would measure a measureless one
    Must be, I think, an obstructed worldling.

One can talk about an arahants experience in terms of phenomenological description, but I'm not sure what purpose it would serve? Historically, it's lead to numerous thickets of views. Better to develop the path and then taste the fruit for oneself. The gnosis and vision of liberation (vimuttiñāṇadassana) -- non-referential inner peace (ajjhattasanti) -- is to be individually experienced (paccatta veditabba). The path is to be developed to this end.

All the best,

Geoff
Nyana
 
Posts: 2227
Joined: Tue Apr 27, 2010 11:56 am

Re: Do arahants discard vipaka/suffering?

Postby Nyana » Thu Apr 07, 2011 10:53 am

piotr wrote:On the other hand:

    'Monks, the body of the Tathagata stands with the link that bound it to becoming cut. As long as the body subsists, devas and humans will see him. But at the breaking-up of the body and the exhaustion of the life-span, devas and humans will see him no more. Monks, just as when the stalk of a bunch of mangoes has been cut, all the mangoes on it go with it, just so the Tathagata's link with becoming has been cut. As long as the body subsists, devas and humans will see him. But at the breaking-up of the body and the exhaustion of the life-span, devas and humans will see him no more.'

Sure, an arahant has a body. But an arahant is also utterly freed from reference/classification/reckoning in terms of form (rūpasaṅkhayavimutta). The same is the case for the other aggregates.

All the best,

Geoff
Nyana
 
Posts: 2227
Joined: Tue Apr 27, 2010 11:56 am

Re: Do arahants discard vipaka/suffering?

Postby acinteyyo » Thu Apr 07, 2011 11:30 am

Ñāṇa wrote:
tiltbillings wrote:Well, it may be mere designation, but it is still something that can be talked about. Or at least the Buddha seemed to think so, otherwise we would not have the such designation as khandhas and the "all" put forth by the Buddha as ways of talking about such stuff, even if it is mere designation.

The all is to be abandoned. The path is to be developed in order to abandon the all. The path is entirely 100% fabricated for that specific purpose. The raft is for crossing over, not for carrying around once crossed over, and certainly not for constructing philosophies.

All the best,

Geoff

:goodpost: this hits the nail on the head again! We are too often mislead still trying to describe the measureless with inapropriate means.
Thank you Geoff for reminding...

best wishes, acinteyyo
Pubbe cāhaṃ bhikkhave, etarahi ca dukkhañceva paññāpemi, dukkhassa ca nirodhaṃ. (M.22)
Api cāhaṃ, āvuso, imasmiṃyeva byāmamatte kaḷevare, sasaññimhi samanake lokañca paññāpemi lokasamudayañca lokanirodhañca lokanirodhagāminiñca paṭipadan. (AN4.45)

:anjali:
User avatar
acinteyyo
 
Posts: 1055
Joined: Mon Jun 01, 2009 9:48 am
Location: Neuburg/Donau, Germany

Re: Do arahants discard vipaka/suffering?

Postby retrofuturist » Thu Apr 07, 2011 12:07 pm

Greetings Piotr,

piotr wrote:No, it doesn't. But now I understand what you've meant, thanks. Can you tell me how does passage quoted by me “covers the nidanas from nama-rupa through to vedana”?

I was talking about the sutta rather than the sentence you extracted from it, because context is everything.

Colour coded for your convenience...

Nama-rupa
Salayatana
Phassa
Vedana

The sutta, SN 35.237 as translated by Bhikkhu Bodhi...

"Bhikkhus, when there are hands, there is picking up and putting down...

"So too, bhikkhus, when there is the eye, pleasure and pain arise internally with eye-contact as condition.... When there is the mind, pleasure and pain arise internally with mind-contact as condition.

"When, bhikkhus, there are no hands, there is no picking up and putting down....

"So too, bhikkhus, when there is no eye... no mind, no pleasure and pain arise internally with mind-contact as condition.


Metta,
Retro. :)
If you have asked me of the origination of unease, then I shall explain it to you in accordance with my understanding:
Whatever various forms of unease there are in the world, They originate founded in encumbering accumulation. (Pārāyanavagga)


Exalted in mind, just open and clearly aware, the recluse trained in the ways of the sages:
One who is such, calmed and ever mindful, He has no sorrows! -- Udana IV, 7


Dharma Wheel (Mahayana / Vajrayana forum) -- Open flower ~ Open book (blog)
User avatar
retrofuturist
Site Admin
 
Posts: 14770
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 9:52 pm
Location: Melbourne, Australia

Re: Do arahants discard vipaka/suffering?

Postby piotr » Thu Apr 07, 2011 12:21 pm

Hi Retrofuturist,

I find your explaination odd. Of course — part of this sutta is about paṭicca-samuppāda. But piece about hands and picking up and so on, in my opinion has nothing to do with p-s. In fact from context it's clear that dependence on hands of picking up and putting down is illustration for dependence on contact of pleasure and pain.
Bhagavaṃmūlakā no, bhante, dhammā...
User avatar
piotr
 
Posts: 371
Joined: Sat Jan 17, 2009 4:33 pm
Location: Khettadesa

Re: Do arahants discard vipaka/suffering?

Postby retrofuturist » Thu Apr 07, 2011 12:31 pm

Greetings piotr,

piotr wrote:But piece about hands and picking up and so on, in my opinion has nothing to do with p-s. In fact from context it's clear that dependence on hands of picking up and putting down is illustration for dependence on contact of pleasure and pain.

Do you think so? I just realised (.... I must be getting tired, it's getting late...) that I missed part of the sutta, denoted by the ellipsis, where I should have copied parts from SN 35.236.

The 'hands' part reads as follows......

"Bhikkhus, when there are hands, picking up and putting down are discerned. When there are feet, coming and going are discerned. When there are limbs, bending and stretching are discerned. When there is the belly, hunger and thirst are discerned"

To me that is about the designation (nama) of form (rupa).... nama-rupa.

You may however define nama-rupa differently to me... I understand it along the lines of the interpretations of Bhikkhu Nanananda, not the Mahaviharist "mind and body" interpretation.

poitr wrote:I find your explaination odd.

I'm used to that... but I'm always open to people demonstrating I am incorrect and/or deepening my understanding so don't hesitate to interrogate.

Metta,
Retro. :)
If you have asked me of the origination of unease, then I shall explain it to you in accordance with my understanding:
Whatever various forms of unease there are in the world, They originate founded in encumbering accumulation. (Pārāyanavagga)


Exalted in mind, just open and clearly aware, the recluse trained in the ways of the sages:
One who is such, calmed and ever mindful, He has no sorrows! -- Udana IV, 7


Dharma Wheel (Mahayana / Vajrayana forum) -- Open flower ~ Open book (blog)
User avatar
retrofuturist
Site Admin
 
Posts: 14770
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 9:52 pm
Location: Melbourne, Australia

PreviousNext

Return to General Theravāda discussion

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Spiny Norman and 9 guests