The causes for wisdom

An open and inclusive investigation into Buddhism and spiritual cultivation

Re: The causes for wisdom

Postby Mr Man » Thu May 02, 2013 12:22 pm

Alex123 wrote:
SamKR wrote:Hi Retro,
When someone says "there is no self", he could be saying in the sense of ontological annihilationism that was refuted by the Buddha.
Or, he could be saying in the sense of "there is no self to be found in all Dhammas" while directly seeing the phenomena. I think, the latter sense is equivalent to saying "all Dhammas are not self".

:anjali:



Maybe anatta means that one should not consider anything that arises as self. This is active practice, while static "There is/isn't self" is a view.


Or the ground where it arises. Or that that knows that it has arisen.

The Anatta-lakkhana Sutta is fairly straight forward.
User avatar
Mr Man
 
Posts: 1241
Joined: Tue Oct 04, 2011 8:42 am

Re: The causes for wisdom

Postby chownah » Thu May 02, 2013 2:28 pm

Alex123 wrote:
Maybe anatta means that one should not consider anything that arises as self. This is active practice, while static "There is/isn't self" is a view.

I agree with this and would take it one step farther by suggesting that the concept of self should ideally not be even considered at all but of course getting to that way of thinking is mostly beyond most of us or perhaps can be realized for only a brief moment when the mind is highly concentrated I guess......don't know for sure......
chownah
chownah
 
Posts: 2670
Joined: Wed Aug 12, 2009 2:19 pm

Re: The causes for wisdom

Postby robertk » Fri May 03, 2013 6:04 am

Just to be sure we are all on the same page:
Retro do you accept these statement s from the visiddhimagga

"There is no doer of a deed, or one who reaps the result. Phenomena alone flow on, no other view than this right."Visuddhimagga XIX19"

This is mere mentality-materiality, there is no being, no person"XVIII24

"The mental and material (nama rupa) are really hereBut here is no human being to be found, for it is void and merely fashioned like a doll"
User avatar
robertk
 
Posts: 1247
Joined: Sat Jan 03, 2009 2:08 am

Re: The causes for wisdom

Postby tiltbillings » Fri May 03, 2013 6:28 am

robertk wrote:Just to be sure we are all on the same page:
Retro do you accept these statement s from the visiddhimagga

"There is no doer of a deed, or one who reaps the result. Phenomena alone flow on, no other view than this right."Visuddhimagga XIX19"

This is mere mentality-materiality, there is no being, no person"XVIII24

"The mental and material (nama rupa) are really hereBut here is no human being to be found, for it is void and merely fashioned like a doll"
Interestingly, for the same reason there is no "doer" to be found, there is, in fact, no "phenomena" to be found.

The problem with robertk's quotes is, of course, that they are coming from a particular level, or a particular way, of speaking about things. It is not necessarily more true just because it uses impersonal laguage. Reliance on such impersonal language is not without its own danger of misunderstanding for the one who uses it.
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: 19404
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2008 9:25 am

Re: The causes for wisdom

Postby retrofuturist » Fri May 03, 2013 8:46 am

Greetings Robert,

robertk wrote:Just to be sure we are all on the same page:
Retro do you accept these statement s from the visiddhimagga

"There is no doer of a deed, or one who reaps the result. Phenomena alone flow on, no other view than this right."Visuddhimagga XIX19"

This is mere mentality-materiality, there is no being, no person"XVIII24

"The mental and material (nama rupa) are really hereBut here is no human being to be found, for it is void and merely fashioned like a doll"

The Visuddhimagga regards dhammas and nama-rupa as ontological propositions (i.e. as so called "ultimate realities" that either exist or do not) rather than as conditioned phenomenological experiences (sankhata dhamma)... so to that extent the Visuddhimagga and I speak different languages altogether.

SN 12.15 wrote:"Lord, 'Right view, right view,' it is said. To what extent is there right view?"

"By & large, Kaccayana, this world is supported by (takes as its object) a polarity, that of existence & non-existence. But when one sees the origination of the world as it actually is with right discernment, 'non-existence' with reference to the world does not occur to one. When one sees the cessation of the world as it actually is with right discernment, 'existence' with reference to the world does not occur to one.

It is for this reason that I do not even consider Ven.Buddhaghosa to be a stream-entrant, despite his obvious enthusiasm for matters pertaining to the Dhamma. Much of the "thicket of views" he falls into seems to pertain to his (and more broadly, early Theravada's) obsession with refuting the puggalavadins. Sujinism seems like the logical conclusion and ultimate expression of this historical obsession with the puggala.

So to answer your question about whether I "accept" these statements, I do not even "entertain" them, because unlike Buddhaghosa, I have no intention of speculating on that which is beyond range.

SN 35.23 wrote:The Blessed One said, "What is the All? Simply the eye & forms, ear & sounds, nose & aromas, tongue & flavors, body & tactile sensations, intellect & ideas. This, monks, is called the All. Anyone who would say, 'Repudiating this All, I will describe another,' if questioned on what exactly might be the grounds for his statement, would be unable to explain, and furthermore, would be put to grief. Why? Because it lies beyond range."

(well you did ask...)

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: 14656
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 9:52 pm
Location: Melbourne, Australia

Re: The causes for wisdom

Postby Dan74 » Fri May 03, 2013 12:29 pm

Do we really need to use terms like "Sujinists" (I know Tilt's already used it) but I just hope that we don't make this a habit, but respect each other as fellow Dhamma practitioners.

It just sounds like a dismissive term, kind of like some folks have been dismissive of what is termed "formal practice."
_/|\_
User avatar
Dan74
 
Posts: 2631
Joined: Sun Mar 01, 2009 11:12 pm

Re: The causes for wisdom

Postby robertk » Fri May 03, 2013 1:28 pm

retrofuturist wrote: i do not even consider Ven.Buddhaghosa to be a stream-entrant, despite his obvious enthusiasm for matters pertaining to the Dhamma. Much of the "thicket of views" he falls into seems to pertain to his (and more broadly, early Theravada's) obsession with refuting the puggalavadins. Sujinism seems like the logical conclusion and ultimate expression of this historical obsession with the puggala.



Metta,
Retro. :)

no problem. i think though that you should recognize that monks, adding up to a concensus of milliions, since and before Buddhaghosa have asserted the same things, and revere the works of Buddhaghosa

so when you say that "However, this matter is not new, and such questions have now and previously been asked and answered." i wonder if you being realistic in expecting followers of Theravada to concede that you have the final word and that Buddhaghosa can be dismissed.
User avatar
robertk
 
Posts: 1247
Joined: Sat Jan 03, 2009 2:08 am

Re: The causes for wisdom

Postby kirk5a » Fri May 03, 2013 1:41 pm

robertk wrote:Just to be sure we are all on the same page:
Retro do you accept these statement s from the visiddhimagga

"There is no doer of a deed, or one who reaps the result. Phenomena alone flow on, no other view than this right."Visuddhimagga XIX19"

That sentence is apparently something "the ancients said," quoted by Ven. Buddhaghosa. Now surely it cannot be saying the following is wrong:
A disciple of the noble ones considers this: 'I am not the only one who is owner of my actions, heir to my actions, born of my actions, related through my actions, and have my actions as my arbitrator; who — whatever I do, for good or for evil, to that will I fall heir. To the extent that there are beings — past and future, passing away and re-arising — all beings are the owner of their actions, heir to their actions, born of their actions, related through their actions, and have their actions as their arbitrator. Whatever they do, for good or for evil, to that will they fall heir.' When he/she often reflects on this, the [factors of the] path take birth. He/she sticks with that path, develops it, cultivates it. As he/she sticks with that path, develops it and cultivates it, the fetters are abandoned, the obsessions destroyed.

http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka ... .than.html

The factors of the path take birth. That makes it right view.

So let's look at a few more lines of Ven. Buddhaghosa's quotation:

There is no doer of a deed
Or one who reaps the deed’s result;
Phenomena alone flow on—
No other view than this is right.
And so, while kamma and result
Thus causally maintain their round,
As seed and tree succeed in turn,
No first beginning can be shown.
Nor in the future round of births
Can they be shown not to occur:
Sectarians, not knowing this,
Have failed to gain self-mastery. [603]

http://www.aimwell.org/News/news.html

I think that puts it in a somewhat more complete light.
Last edited by kirk5a on Sun May 19, 2013 2:03 pm, edited 1 time in total.
"When one thing is practiced & pursued, ignorance is abandoned, clear knowing arises, the conceit 'I am' is abandoned, latent tendencies are uprooted, fetters are abandoned. Which one thing? Mindfulness immersed in the body." -AN 1.230
User avatar
kirk5a
 
Posts: 1753
Joined: Thu Sep 23, 2010 1:51 pm

Re: The causes for wisdom

Postby dhamma follower » Fri May 03, 2013 3:00 pm

retrofuturist wrote:Greetings DF,

In relation to your question, it is not really answerable because you repeatedly do precisely as Tilt said - you create strawmen arguments and infer that everyone other than you believes in atman. Trying to engage in dialogue on that premise is pointless.

Let's be very clear... "No self" is an unverifiable ontological proposition and the Buddha did not teach it.

The views you express here in this topic seem single-mindedly fixated on maintaining consistency of speech with this unverifiable ontological proposition of "no self" which you appear to present as the centrepiece of the entire Dhamma, despite the fact the Buddha taught the experiential teaching that "all dhammas (experiences) are not self" rather than the ontological proposition that "there is no self". Ontological speculation seems like a thicket of views, rather than a cause that gives rise to liberative wisdom.

To be honest, I think that by grasping so tightly to this unverifiable ontological proposition that there is no self... an inappropriately derived speculative view which is entirely disconnected from the loka of the six-senses, you have bought into a form of intellectual reductionism that is very disconnected from, and often averse to the path of cultivation that the Buddha actually taught.

It is hard to get excited about this.

Metta,
Retro. :)


Dear Retro,

Hmm, you have projected a proposition that I've never presented here: "there's no self" vs "all dhamma are not self". Simply because that line of debate doesn't interest me at all. For me, the Buddha taught anatta, non-self or not self doesn't really matter to me. However, if I were to be asked about that, I would say: "If All dhammas are not self, What is the self that there can have to be?If it beyond everyone's range of experiences, including the Arahants, why bother defending it?"

To be fair, my contention in this thread, has been centered around the understanding of "all dhammas (except Nibann) arise because of conditions". My arguments have been: the idea of formal meditation implies that

1. One thinks that because one has decided to practice (whether concentrating on an object or trying to be aware of whatever appears), wholesomeness and/or wisdom will arise. If not, WHY does one formally meditate? Does'nt that mean that one thinks the decision of practicing (volition) can condition awareness/wholesomeness/wisdom? Does it accord to the truth that any dhamma, including awareness/wholesomeness/wisdom is conditioned ? And volition is NOT the conditions for those dhammas to arise.
2. When one think that volition can indeed conditions dhammas to arise, isn't it a form of self-identification, of I-making?

Another contention that has been stressed is that "hearing the Dhamma and wise considering" are the conditions for wisdom. They them-selves are also conditioned dhammas and should be understood as such. It is not the doing but it is precisely the correct understanding from hearing the Dhamma which conditions further understanding to grow, from intellectual level to direct level. That should be clear from the very beginning that only causes and effects are at work. If one think that apart from elements which are the causes, and element which are effects, there is another element which actively does the practice, then what is it ? If one sees that causes and effects are doing their own work, creating both samsara and the way out of samsara, one doesn't need to argue that one has to practice sila, samadhi, panna, since it is just a conventional way to describe the processes.

The last main point of my contention is that all wholesomeness, be it samatha and vipassana, are rooted in understanding. For samatha, its development is based on the understanding of what is wholesome and what it unwholesome (as they presently have arisen), of the ways to arouse wholesomeness based on samatha object. For vipassana,its development is based on the understanding of the characteristics of realities as they arise as anatta, of the distinction between materiality and mentality, and eventually of the tilakkhana.

I am of the opinion that we (the majority) today have weak level of wisdom, both for samatha and vipassana. We are merely at the stage of learning to investigate the different realities as they arise, to develop more understanding of them, of whatever kind and level, by conditions. That understanding can one day, probably in a rather distant future, result in jhanna or in vipassana insight, but no one can predict when and what. Even now, whether understanding will arise while one is going to the market or one is arguing on an internet forum or while taking a shower, no one can know. All realities can be understood at any time and any place, without one's deciding to.

Eventhough the development of understanding is an extremely long process, every little understanding now, when it arises, reduces attachment and aversion accordingly. Everyone can consider and verify for one-self.

I think although what I have said in this thread can be unpleasant for many, it can be beneficial for some others, just as it has been beneficial to me to have heard that, as well as to many of my friends. By conditions.

Brgrds,
D.F
dhamma follower
 
Posts: 330
Joined: Fri Nov 06, 2009 5:48 am

Re: The causes for wisdom

Postby daverupa » Fri May 03, 2013 3:49 pm

dhamma follower wrote:And volition is NOT the conditions for those dhammas to arise... When one think that volition can indeed conditions dhammas to arise, isn't it a form of self-identification, of I-making?


However, kamma is intention, and kamma is a means for going beyond samsara. So, we must say that certain volitions can indeed condition wholesome dhammas. For example, harmlessness, non-ill-will, and renunciation come to mind right away...
    "And how is it, bhikkhus, that by protecting oneself one protects others? By the pursuit, development, and cultivation of the four establishments of mindfulness. It is in such a way that by protecting oneself one protects others.

    "And how is it, bhikkhus, that by protecting others one protects oneself? By patience, harmlessness, goodwill, and sympathy. It is in such a way that by protecting others one protects oneself.
- Sedaka Sutta [SN 47.19]
User avatar
daverupa
 
Posts: 4130
Joined: Mon Jan 31, 2011 6:58 pm

Re: The causes for wisdom

Postby tiltbillings » Fri May 03, 2013 4:28 pm

dhamma follower wrote:
To be fair, my contention in this thread, has been centered around the understanding of "all dhammas (except Nibann) arise because of conditions". My arguments have been: the idea of formal meditation implies that

1. One thinks that because one has decided to practice (whether concentrating on an object or trying to be aware of whatever appears), wholesomeness and/or wisdom will arise. If not, WHY does one formally meditate? Does'nt that mean that one thinks the decision of practicing (volition) can condition awareness/wholesomeness/wisdom? Does it accord to the truth that any dhamma, including awareness/wholesomeness/wisdom is conditioned ? And volition is NOT the conditions for those dhammas to arise.
2. When one think that volition can indeed conditions dhammas to arise, isn't it a form of self-identification, of I-making?
And this has been responded to repeatedly, but you seems to ignore what is said, repeating the same old Sujinist talking points, but never really engaging the objections to your strawman characterization of the other ways of practicing that differ from yours.

Volition, kamma, is how we choose to act, and how we choose to act matters in terms of Dhamma practice according to the Buddha. And as has been stated to you numerous times, while we cannot will wisdom to arise (and no one is claiming that we try to do that), by using sila, bhavana, and following the rest of the Eightfold Path we can cultivate the conditions that allows wisdom to arise. The followers of Sujin do that by actively choosing to act by listening to the Dhamma and by actively choosing to act by contemplating/reflecting on the Dhamma.

"When one think that volition can indeed conditions dhammas to arise, isn't it a form of self-identification, of I-making?" When you act by choosing to listen to the Dhamma and when you act by choosing to contemplate/reflect on the Dhamma you listened to, are you not conditioning dhammas to arise? Is that not "self-identification, of I-making?" The criticisms you level at practices other than the Sujinist practices are equally valid for the Sujinist practices, and you certainly have not shown otherwise.

Another contention that has been stressed is that "hearing the Dhamma and wise considering" are the conditions for wisdom. They them-selves are also conditioned dhammas and should be understood as such. It is not the doing but it is precisely the correct understanding from hearing the Dhamma which conditions further understanding to grow, from intellectual level to direct level.
Yes, and that is so with the practicing of sila, bhavana, and following the rest of the Eightfold Path, which are all ways of leading to correct understanding that conditioned bases for wisdom to arise. Why would you consider it to be otherwise, other than by totally and completely misunderstanding the practice of sila, bhavana and following the Eightfoild Path?

That should be clear from the very beginning that only causes and effects are at work.
No one here has said otherwise.

If one think that apart from elements which are the causes, and element which are effects, there is another element which actively does the practice, then what is it ? If one sees that causes and effects are doing their own work, creating both samsara and the way out of samsara, one doesn't need to argue that one has to practice sila, samadhi, panna, since it is just a conventional way to describe the processes.
The problem with this is that the Buddha was quite content with using conventional speech to describe his Dhamma and how to realize. You are, it seems, still trying to drive a wedge between the so-called ultimate language and conventional speech, but that has been dealt with at length, and your position is groundless, carring no weight.

    From the commentary of to the Anguttara Nikaya:
    Herein references to living beings, gods, Brahma, etc., are sammuti-kathā, whereas references to impermanence, suffering, egolessness, the aggregates of the empiric individuality, the spheres and elements of sense perception and mind-cognition, bases of mindfulness, right effort, etc., are paramattha-kathā. One who is capable of understanding and penetrating to the truth and hoisting the flag of Arahantship when the teaching is set out in terms of generally accepted conventions, to him the Buddha preaches the doctrine based on sammuti-kathā. One who is capable of understanding and penetrating to the truth and hoisting the flag of Arahantship when the teaching is set out in terms of ultimate categories, to him the Buddha preaches the doctrine based on paramattha-kathā. To one who is capable of awakening to the truth through sammuti-kathā , the teaching is not presented on the basis of paramattha-kathā, and conversely, to one who is capable of awakening to the truth through paramattha-kathā, the teaching is not presented on the basis of sammuti-kathā. There is this simile on this matter: Just as a teacher of the three Vedas who is capable of explaining their meaning in different dialects might teach his pupils, adopting the particular dialect, which each pupil understands, even so the Buddha preaches the doctrine adopting, according to the suitability of the occasion, either the sammuti- or the paramattha-kathā. It is by taking into consideration the ability of each individual to understand the Four Noble Truths, that the Buddha presents his teaching, either by way of sammuti, or by way of paramattha, or by way of both. Whatever the method adopted the purpose is the same, to show the way to Immortality through the analysis of mental and physical phenomena. AA. Vol. I, pp.54-55 http://kr.buddhism.org/~skb/down/papers/094.pdf
    Sammuti-kathā is not inferior to paramattha-kathā.

The last main point of my contention is that all wholesomeness, be it samatha and vipassana, are rooted in understanding. For samatha, its development is based on the understanding of what is wholesome and what it unwholesome (as they presently have arisen), of the ways to arouse wholesomeness based on samatha object. For vipassana,its development is based on the understanding of the characteristics of realities as they arise as anatta, of the distinction between materiality and mentality, and eventually of the tilakkhana.
Fortunately, wholesomeness is something that can be cultivated by the conditioning nature of the choices we make, which is the point of the practices outlined by the Buddha.

I am of the opinion that we (the majority) today have weak level of wisdom, both for samatha and vipassana.
It is your opinion, but fortunately, not the truth.

We are merely at the stage of learning to investigate the different realities as they arise, to develop more understanding of them, of whatever kind and level, by conditions. That understanding can one day, probably in a rather distant future, result in jhanna or in vipassana insight, but no one can predict when and what. Even now, whether understanding will arise while one is going to the market or one is arguing on an internet forum or while taking a shower, no one can know. All realities can be understood at any time and any place, without one's deciding to.
And this is just sad. The Buddha’s teachings are still far more efficacious than this unnecessarily gloomy picture.

Eventhough the development of understanding is an extremely long process, every little understanding now, when it arises, reduces attachment and aversion accordingly. Everyone can consider and verify for one-self.
By the practice of sila, bhavana and the rest of the Eightfold Path.

I think although what I have said in this thread can be unpleasant for many, it can be beneficial for some others, just as it has been beneficial to me to have heard that, as well as to many of my friends.
It is unpleasant, not because it is challenging, but because it is a sad version of the Buddha’s teachings that you are advocating. Fortunately, there are other more efficacious understandings to the Buddha’s Dhamma than what you are advocating here.
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: 19404
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2008 9:25 am

Re: The causes for wisdom

Postby Alex123 » Fri May 03, 2013 6:00 pm

Dear Dhamma Follower,

dhamma follower wrote:1. One thinks that because one has decided to practice (whether concentrating on an object or trying to be aware of whatever appears), wholesomeness and/or wisdom will arise....


Same can be said "read ADL" and eventually wholesomeness (sati + paññā) will arise.


dhamma follower wrote:2. When one think that volition can indeed conditions dhammas to arise, isn't it a form of self-identification, of I-making?


If one is dropped into a deep lake, one needs to swim so not to drown. Of course swimming is fully conditioned, one of the conditions being the application of wise effort RIGHT NOW.

dhamma follower wrote:Another contention that has been stressed is that "hearing the Dhamma and wise considering" are the conditions for wisdom.


Just like learning swimming styles, same is here. You learn proper things to do and to study, and then you apply them. Or, get drown in lake of kilesas.


dhamma follower wrote: That should be clear from the very beginning that only causes and effects are at work.


Right. If a person is droped into a deep lake, one can't simply do nothing until "causes and conditions" rescue one. Swimming IS one of those causes and conditions.

dhamma follower wrote:I am of the opinion that we (the majority) today have weak level of wisdom, both for samatha and vipassana.


Great. Why ignore what the suttas, Abhidhamma, Vinaya, and even Visuddhimagga say about practice and believe different information from few modern
lay person who know better?


If majority of people mistakenly believe in "formal practice", why didn't the Buddha refute it left-and-right on every occasion? Why did he ask people to go into the forest, cave, empty building, etc, etc, and meditate?
”Even the water melting from the snow-capped peaks finds its way to the ocean."
User avatar
Alex123
 
Posts: 2847
Joined: Wed Mar 10, 2010 11:32 pm

Re: The causes for wisdom

Postby tiltbillings » Fri May 03, 2013 6:03 pm

robertk wrote:
retrofuturist wrote: i do not even consider Ven.Buddhaghosa to be a stream-entrant, despite his obvious enthusiasm for matters pertaining to the Dhamma. Much of the "thicket of views" he falls into seems to pertain to his (and more broadly, early Theravada's) obsession with refuting the puggalavadins. Sujinism seems like the logical conclusion and ultimate expression of this historical obsession with the puggala.



Metta,
Retro. :)

no problem. i think though that you should recognize that monks, adding up to a concensus of milliions, since and before Buddhaghosa have asserted the same things, and revere the works of Buddhaghosa

so when you say that "However, this matter is not new, and such questions have now and previously been asked and answered." i wonder if you being realistic in expecting followers of Theravada to concede that you have the final word and that Buddhaghosa can be dismissed.
It certainly looks like you have not accurately represented Buddhaghosa in the "There is no doer of a deed" snippet you quoted, and certainly Buddhaghosa advocates the practice of sila, bhavana, and the rest of the Eightfold Path in away that you reject. So, it seems that you really cannot lay claim to Buddhaghosa.
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: 19404
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2008 9:25 am

Re: The causes for wisdom

Postby retrofuturist » Fri May 03, 2013 8:45 pm

Greetings Robert,

robertk wrote:i wonder if you being realistic in expecting followers of Theravada to concede that you have the final word and that Buddhaghosa can be dismissed.

I wasn't seeking some objective consensus ~ simply articulating my position on the matter in response to your question. People may believe as they wish...

SN 20.7 wrote:"In the same way, in the course of the future there will be monks who won't listen when discourses that are words of the Tathagata — deep, deep in their meaning, transcendent, connected with emptiness — are being recited. They won't lend ear, won't set their hearts on knowing them, won't regard these teachings as worth grasping or mastering. But they will listen when discourses that are literary works — the works of poets, elegant in sound, elegant in rhetoric, the work of outsiders, words of disciples — are recited. They will lend ear and set their hearts on knowing them. They will regard these teachings as worth grasping & mastering.

"In this way the disappearance of the discourses that are words of the Tathagata — deep, deep in their meaning, transcendent, connected with emptiness — will come about.

"Thus you should train yourselves: 'We will listen when discourses that are words of the Tathagata — deep, deep in their meaning, transcendent, connected with emptiness — are being recited. We will lend ear, will set our hearts on knowing them, will regard these teachings as worth grasping & mastering.' That's how you should train yourselves."

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: 14656
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 9:52 pm
Location: Melbourne, Australia

Re: The causes for wisdom

Postby dhamma follower » Sat May 04, 2013 1:43 am

The followers of Sujin do that by actively choosing to act by listening to the Dhamma and by actively choosing to act by contemplating/reflecting on the Dhamma.


Not the act of choosing it-self, but the understanding that choosing now happens by conditions, which can eventually lead to some little understanding. One might listen for years without any correct understanding.

following the rest of the Eightfold Path, which are all ways of leading to correct understanding


You say that Eightfold Path means formal practice, right? And lt leads to correct understanding later. But I say EFP doesn't mean formal practice, but it arises with any moment of correct understanding, starting now, which leads to the supermundane EFP later. No correct understanding now, no EFP.

You are, it seems, still trying to drive a wedge between the so-called ultimate language and conventional speech


As I've said: not a matter of language but of understanding. If there's understanding of the ultimate, no problem to use conventional. But when the ultimate is stated, and someone tries to show the conventional as an counter arguments to the ultimate, it means that he doesn't see that both are the same.
dhamma follower
 
Posts: 330
Joined: Fri Nov 06, 2009 5:48 am

Re: The causes for wisdom

Postby dhamma follower » Sat May 04, 2013 1:49 am

daverupa wrote:
dhamma follower wrote:And volition is NOT the conditions for those dhammas to arise... When one think that volition can indeed conditions dhammas to arise, isn't it a form of self-identification, of I-making?


However, kamma is intention, and kamma is a means for going beyond samsara. So, we must say that certain volitions can indeed condition wholesome dhammas. For example, harmlessness, non-ill-will, and renunciation come to mind right away...


Greeting Daverupa,

Let’s talk about kamma.

1. Kammas are of two kinds: wholesome and unwholesome. The wholesome is again of two kinds: with understanding, and without understanding. Understanding is of two kinds, again: mundane understanding, and understanding of the four Noble truth. Do you agree that only the last kind of kamma is the one which can lead to the beyond ?
2. Kammas are also of three kinds: Bodily, verbal and mental. Of the three, the mental kamma is the leader. Bodily and verbal are merely outward expression of the mental, do you agree? (Upali sutta)

From (1) and (2), we get the kind of kamma which can lead to the beyond: the moments of right understanding. When one hears the word kamma, one thinks of action, doing something, but when considering more carefully, it is not so.

You think that because volition is kamma is the means to go beyond, it proves that volition can condition wholesomeness. However, volition arises with all kinds of citta, wholesome as well as unwholesome. The causes of the wholesome mental factors which arise with volition to make the citta wholesome kamma have nothing to do with volition, they each has their own conditions to arise, for example adosa (non-hate) has "seeing the good sides of others” as condition for its arising, right effort has “the sense of urgency” as conditions etc….These conditions are them-selves also dhammas which have their own conditions to arise. Like now, can you say let’s the sense of urgency arise in me, and then it will arise? But when by conditions ( thanks to hearing the Dhamma and reflecting wisely), it does arise at a non-predicted moment, it conditions right effort to perform its own functions. At that moment, there’s kamma which leads to the beyond.

Brgrds,

D.F
dhamma follower
 
Posts: 330
Joined: Fri Nov 06, 2009 5:48 am

Re: The causes for wisdom

Postby dhamma follower » Sat May 04, 2013 2:06 am

Same can be said "read ADL" and eventually wholesomeness (sati + paññā) will arise.


Buddha never said "doing something is the cause of wisdom", he said "hearing the Dhamma is". But without right consideration, no understanding. It is beyond anyone's control whether there's right consideration or not.

If one is dropped into a deep lake, one needs to swim so not to drown. Of course swimming is fully conditioned, one of the conditions being the application of wise effort RIGHT NOW.


No, swimming is conditioned by right and thourough understanding of anattaness. A sutta for you:

Like a weak man come to the bank of river Ganges, full to the brim with over flowing banks would say I will cut the stream of the river, with my hands and safely cross the river. It is not posssible that he would cross the river. In the same manner, when the Teaching is given for the cessation of the view of self, the mind does not spring, delight and settle to be released. It should be known as the nature of that weak man. Like a strong man come to the bank of river Ganges, full to the brim with over flowing banks would say I will cut the stream of the river, with my hands and safely cross the river. It is posssible that he would cross the river. In the same manner, Ananda, when the Teaching is given for the cessation of the view of self, the mind springs, delights and settles to be released, it should be known as the nature of the strong man.. .

http://www.vipassana.info/064-maha-malu ... tta-e1.htm

Great. Why ignore what the suttas, Abhidhamma, Vinaya, and even Visuddhimagga say about practice and believe different information from few modern
lay person who know better?


Obviously we have different understandings of the texts, Alex. If it is clearly understood under the light of causes and conditions, of anattaness, you will not see in it "formal practice", just causes and conditions. As for lay person, it is not a criteria of inferiority when it comes to understanding the Dhamma.
dhamma follower
 
Posts: 330
Joined: Fri Nov 06, 2009 5:48 am

Re: The causes for wisdom

Postby retrofuturist » Sat May 04, 2013 2:21 am

Greetings,

dhamma follower wrote:It is beyond anyone's control whether there's right consideration or not.

dhamma follower wrote:These conditions are them-selves also dhammas which have their own conditions to arise. Like now, can you say let’s the sense of urgency arise in me, and then it will arise? But when by conditions ( thanks to hearing the Dhamma and reflecting wisely), it does arise at a non-predicted moment, it conditions right effort to perform its own functions. At that moment, there’s kamma which leads to the beyond.


fa·tal·ism
/ˈfātlˌizəm/
Noun
1. The belief that all events are predetermined and therefore inevitable.
2. A submissive attitude to events, resulting from such a belief.

Dhammafollower... what do you make of the following statement, in particular the bolded portion?

There is no shortening or lengthening, no accelerating or decelerating. Just as a ball of string, when thrown, comes to its end simply by unwinding, in the same way, having transmigrated and wandered on, the wise and the foolish alike will put an end to pain.'

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: 14656
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 9:52 pm
Location: Melbourne, Australia

Re: The causes for wisdom

Postby tiltbillings » Sat May 04, 2013 2:49 am

dhamma follower wrote:
The followers of Sujin do that by actively choosing to act by listening to the Dhamma and by actively choosing to act by contemplating/reflecting on the Dhamma.


Not the act of choosing it-self, but the understanding that choosing now happens by conditions, which can eventually lead to some little understanding. One might listen for years without any correct understanding.
That is why the Buddha advocated more than listening. Sadly, you are ignoring much of the Buddha's teachings.

following the rest of the Eightfold Path, which are all ways of leading to correct understanding


You say that Eightfold Path means formal practice, right? And lt leads to correct understanding later. But I say EFP doesn't mean formal practice, but it arises with any moment of correct understanding, starting now, which leads to the supermundane EFP later. No correct understanding now, no EFP.
I never said that the Eightfold Path means just "formal practice." The Eightfold Path is how one live one's life, from one moment to the next, from one choice to the next, and the core choice is one of paying attention.

You are, it seems, still trying to drive a wedge between the so-called ultimate language and conventional speech


As I've said: not a matter of language but of understanding. If there's understanding of the ultimate, no problem to use conventional. But when the ultimate is stated, and someone tries to show the conventional as an counter arguments to the ultimate, it means that he doesn't see that both are the same.
It would seem that you do not quite have a handle on this. The problem is, is with your use "ultimate" language itself. It seems that the Sujinist version of "ultimate" language, as expressed by you, roberrtk, and pt1 is seriously flawed as a way of expressing the Dhamma.
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: 19404
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2008 9:25 am

Re: The causes for wisdom

Postby tiltbillings » Sat May 04, 2013 3:10 am

dhamma follower wrote:Like now, can you say let’s the sense of urgency arise in me, and then it will arise? But when by conditions ( thanks to hearing the Dhamma and reflecting wisely), it does arise at a non-predicted moment, it conditions right effort to perform its own functions. At that moment, there’s kamma which leads to the beyond.
You are embarrassing yourself here. One can cultivate, as the Buddha clearly advocated, practices that gives rise to the Dhamma sense of urgency. This is not just a matter of "listening," it is definitely a matter of doing, of willfully acting::


    Once the Blessed One was staying in the Brick Hall at Naadikaa. There he addressed the monks as follows:

    "Mindfulness of death, monks, if cultivated and frequently practiced, brings great fruit, great benefit; it merges in the Deathless, ends in the Deathless. And how, monks, is it cultivated (in that way)?

    "When, monks, the day fades and night sets in... or when the night is spent and the day breaks, a monk should reflect thus: 'Many might be the causes of my death: a snake or a scorpion or a centipede may sting me, and through that I may die. This would be a hindrance to me.[16] Or I may stumble and have a fall; or the food I ate may cause illness; or bile, phlegm, or piercing (pains of body-) gases may upset my health; humans or non-humans may assault me; and through this I may die. That would be a hindrance to me.'

    "Then that monk should further reflect thus: 'Do I harbor in myself any evil and unwholesome qualities, which are still undiscarded and would be a hindrance to me if I were to die tonight or during the day?'

    "If, on reflection, that monk realizes that those evil, unwholesome qualities are still in him, then he should, with strong resolve, apply all his effort, vigor and exertion, (together with) mindfulness and clear comprehension, for the sake of discarding them.

    "Just as a man whose turban or hair is on fire will, to extinguish the fire, with strong resolve, apply all his effort, vigor and exertion, (together with) mindfulness and clear comprehension; even so should that monk resolutely apply all his effort... for discarding his evil and unwholesome qualities.

    "But if, on reflection, that monk realizes that there are in him no such evil and unwholesome qualities that might be a hindrance to him if he were to die tonight or during the day, then he may well feel gladness and joy. By day and night he should train himself in everything that is beneficial.

    "If, monks, mindfulness of death is cultivated in that way, and is frequently practiced, it will bring great fruit, great benefit, and it will merge in the Deathless, will end in the Deathless."


    16.Comy.: "When dying as an unliberated worldling (puthujjana), it would be a hindrance either to a heavenly rebirth or to attaining the paths of emancipation."

    — AN 8.74 http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/auth ... tml#book-8

This conventional speech speaks far more eloquently than does the Sujin version of "ultimate" language.
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: 19404
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2008 9:25 am

PreviousNext

Return to Open Dhamma

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 8 guests