Page 7 of 84

Re: The causes for wisdom

Posted: Fri Jan 25, 2013 9:49 am
by robertk
Sammohavinodanii (Dispeller of Delusion) by Buddhaghosa, pp.138-9,



"In the description of Right View, by dukkhe ~naa.na.m ('knowledge concerning suffering) and so on are pointed out the four truths as meditation subject. Herein, the first two are process [of existence], the last two standstill. Among these the bhikkhu's laying to heart (abhiniveso) of the meditation subject is in the process, there is no laying to heart in the standstill. For the meditator works on his meditation subject by learning in from a teacher in brief thus: 'Which are the five aggregates?' and he goes over it verbally again and again. But as regards the other two truths, he does his work by hearing: 'the Truth of Cessation is agreeable, desirable, pleasing, the Truth of the Path is agreeable, desirable, pleasing.' Doing his work thus, he penetrates the four truths with a single penetration. He achieves them with a single achievement. He penetrates suffering with the penetration of full understanding, origination with the penetration of abandoning, cessation with the achievement of realisation and the path with the achievement of development. Thus for him there comes to be in the prior stage penetration by learning, questioning, hearing, remembering and comprehending in regard to two truths; and penetration; and penetration by hearing only in regard to two.



Herein, two truths are profound because of being difficult to see, and two are difficult to see on account of being profound. For the Truth of Suffering is evident once it arises because one has to say: 'Ah, the pain!' in respect of encounters with stumps and thorns, etc.; and origination is evident once it arises as desire to chew, desire to eat, and so on. But as to the penetration of their characteristics, both are profound; accordingly these are profound because of being difficult to see. But the work for seeing the other two is like extending the hand for the purpose of seizing the summit of existence, like extending the foot for the purpose of seizing [the hell called] Avicii, like the placing (pa.tipaadana.m) end to end of a hair split a hundred times. Accordingly these are difficult to see because of being profound. Thus this passage 'knowledge concerning suffering', etc. is stated with reference to the arising of knowledge in the prior stage by learning etc. in regard to the four truths which are profound because they are difficult to see and difficult to see because they are profound. But at the moment of penetration the knowledge is only one."

Re: The causes for wisdom

Posted: Fri Jan 25, 2013 9:53 am
by tiltbillings
robertk wrote: . . .
Thank you. I do not, however, see anything in either Buddhaghosa or the Buddha quotes of both msgs that would support your position that you outline in this msg: http://www.dhammawheel.com/viewtopic.ph ... 60#p228510" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Also, your postings do not really answer my question -- that I can see -- about the arising of wisdom.

Re: The causes for wisdom

Posted: Fri Jan 25, 2013 10:15 am
by robertk
your question was "how does one deepen wisdom?"
daverupa gave us this sutta on the first page of this thread:
You might be thinking of the Ghosa Sutta:
"
Monks, there are these two conditions for the arising of right view. Which two? The voice of another and appropriate attention. These are the two conditions for the arising of right view."
right view is a synonym for wisdom.
in the citation from the samohavinodani above it says:
Thus for him there comes to be in the prior stage penetration by learning, questioning, hearing, remembering and comprehending in regard to two truths;

Re: The causes for wisdom

Posted: Fri Jan 25, 2013 10:22 am
by robertk
a bit more regarding how to deepen wisdom:
When, Bhikkhus, a Noble Disciple listens carefully to the Dhamma,
alert with keen ears,
attending to it as a matter of crucial concern, as something of vital
importance, directing
his entire mind to it, in that very moment the Five Mental Hindrances
are absent in him.
On that occasion the Seven Links to Awakening develop towards
complete fulfilment...>

Source (edited extract):
The Grouped Sayings of the Buddha. Samyutta Nikaya.
Book [V: 95-6] section 46: The Links. 38: Unhindered


and

M II, no 95, Cankiisutta.

<http://www.metta.lk/tipitaka/2Sutta-Pit ... ma-Nikaya/
Majjhima2/095-canki-e1.html >

'Good Gotama, now, I know the realising of the truth. How is this attained? Good Gotama, teach me that attainment and realization.'

'Bharadvàja, practising, developing and making much of those same things lead to the realization of the truth. I declare that the realization of the truth is this much.'

'Good Gotama, now I know the realising of the truth. What things are of much help for realising the truth?'

'Bharadvàja, the fourfold endeavour is of much help for the realisation of the truth. If not for the fourfold endeavour, the realisation of the truth is not. Therefore the fourfold endeavour is of much help for the realisation of the truth.'

'Good Gotama, for the fourfold endeavour, what thing is of much help?'

'Bharadvàja, weighing [1] is of much help for the fourfold endeavour. Without the weighing there is no fourfold effort, therefore weighing is of much help for the fourfold endeavour.'

'Good Gotama, for weighing, what thing is of much help?'

'Bharadvàja, struggling [2] is of much help for weighing. Without that struggle there is no weighing, therefore that struggle is of much help for weighing'

'Good Gotama, for struggling, what thing is of much help?'

'Bharadvàja, interest, is of much help for struggling. Without that interest, there is no struggle, therefore that interest is of much help for struggling.'

'Good Gotama, for interest, what thing is of much help?'

'Bharadvàja, rightful speculation [3] is of much help for interest. Without the rightful speculating mind, there is no interest, therefore the rightful speculative mind is of much help for interest.'

'Good Gotama, for a rightful speculative mind, what thing is of much help?'

'Bharadvàja, examining the meanings in the Teaching, is of much help for a rightful speculative mind. Without that examining of meanings in the Teaching, there is norightful speculation, therefore examining
meanings in the Teaching is of much help for a speculative mind.'

'Good Gotama, for examining meanings in the Teaching, what thing is of much help?'

'Bharadvàja, bearing the Teaching in the mind, is of much help for examining meanings in the Teaching. Without bearing the Teaching in mind, there is no examination of meanings, therefore bearing the Teaching in mind is of much help for examining meanings in the Teaching.'

'Good Gotama, for bearing the Teaching in the mind, what thing is of much help?'

'Bharadvàja, listening to the Teaching, is of much help for bearing the Teaching in the mind. Without listening to the Teaching, there is no bearing of the Teaching, therefore listening to the Teaching, is of much help for bearing the Teaching in the mind.'

'Good Gotama, for listening to the Teaching, what thing is of much help?'

'Bharadvàja, lending ear, is of much help for listening to the Teaching. Without lending ear there is no listening to the Teaching, therefore, lending ear, is of much help for listening to the Teaching.'

'Good Gotama, for lending ear, what thing is of much help?'

'Bharadvàja, associating, is of much help for lending ear. Without association there is no lending ears, therefore associating is of much help for lending ear.'

'Good Gotama, for associating, what thing is of much help?'

'Bharadvàja, approaching, is of much help for associating Without an approach there is no association, therefore approaching is of much help for associating.'

'Good Gotama, for approaching, what thing is of much help?'

'Bharadvàja, faith, is of much help for approaching Without faith there is no approaching, therefore faith is of much help for approaching.'...

[1] Weighing is of much help for the fourfold endeavour (padhànassa kho bharadvàja tulanà bahukàrà). The fourfold endeavours are pushing the mind forward earnestly, to dispel arisen demerit to promote non arising of not arisen demerit To promote the arising of not arisen merit and to see the development and completion of arisen merit. For this kind of mental work to happen, we should mentally weigh our activities by body speech and mind. We should be aware of the activities at the six doors of mental contact.

[2] Struggling is of much help for weighing (tulanàya kho bharadvàja ussàho bahukàro hoti). This is a mental struggle. It consists of thinking and pondering to sort out the correct and comes to be right thinking.

[3] Right speculation is of much help for interest (chandassa kho Bharadvàja dhammanijjhànakhanti bahukàrà). Right speculation falls to the category of right thinking. So this is falling to the Noble Eightfold path, with right view at the foremost.

Re: The causes for wisdom

Posted: Fri Jan 25, 2013 10:32 am
by tiltbillings
robertk wrote:your question was "how does one deepen wisdom?"
daverupa gave us this sutta on the first page of this thread:
You might be thinking of the Ghosa Sutta:
"
Monks, there are these two conditions for the arising of right view. Which two? The voice of another and appropriate attention. These are the two conditions for the arising of right view."
right view is a synonym for wisdom.
in the citation from the samohavinodani above it says:
Thus for him there comes to be in the prior stage penetration by learning, questioning, hearing, remembering and comprehending in regard to two truths;
Yes; however, all this can be easily interpreted differently than you are suggesting. In other words I do not see anything that is unquestionably definitive in supporting your position. I shrug my shoulders. I shall step back and let others see what they can in all this.

Re: The causes for wisdom

Posted: Fri Jan 25, 2013 10:38 am
by Coyote
Perhaps I am wrong, but isn't one of the issues that separated Theravada from other early schools of Buddhism the idea that there exists a conventional person i.e the difference between conventional and ultimate reality? I am sure I heard somewhere that other early schools did not share this idea. Perhaps someone with better knowledge can comment because I can't remember where I heard this.

:anjali:

Re: The causes for wisdom

Posted: Fri Jan 25, 2013 10:43 am
by robertk
Yes the puggalavadins believed in a real conventional self

Re: The causes for wisdom

Posted: Fri Jan 25, 2013 10:43 am
by retrofuturist
Greetings Coyote,

I suspect you're talking about the Pudgalavādins...

http://www.iep.utm.edu/pudgalav/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Metta,
Retro. :)

Re: The causes for wisdom

Posted: Fri Jan 25, 2013 10:45 am
by tiltbillings
Coyote wrote:Perhaps I am wrong, but isn't one of the issues that separated Theravada from other early schools of Buddhism the idea that there exists a conventional person i.e the difference between conventional and ultimate reality? I am sure I heard somewhere that other early schools did not share this idea. Perhaps someone with better knowledge can comment because I can't remember where I heard this.

:anjali:
Yes. The pudgala, a vexed notion that seemed to annoy the crap out of some schools (such as the Theravadins), but what I am talking about is simply the sense of self, which when carefully looked at is seen as a product of the khandhas and ignorance.

Re: The causes for wisdom

Posted: Fri Jan 25, 2013 11:16 am
by Coyote
Thanks, yes that is who I am thinking of.
tiltbillings wrote:Yes. The pudgala, a vexed notion that seemed to annoy the crap out of some schools (such as the Theravadins), but what I am talking about is simply the sense of self, which when carefully looked at is seen as a product of the khandhas and ignorance.
Couldn't this be seen in terms of determinism - I seem to remember that in several places the Buddha argues against the view of no-choice for the reason that it stops a person properly applying themselves to the path, particularly Sila, or any kind of morality.

I.e http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka ... .than.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
"Monks, there are these three sectarian guilds that — when cross-examined, pressed for reasons, & rebuked by wise people — even though they may explain otherwise, remain stuck in [a doctrine of] inaction. Which three?

"There are brahmans & contemplatives who hold this teaching, hold this view: 'Whatever a person experiences — pleasant, painful, or neither pleasant nor painful — that is all caused by what was done in the past.'

'Then in that case, a person is a killer of living beings because of what was done in the past. A person is a thief... unchaste... a liar... a divisive speaker... a harsh speaker... an idle chatterer... greedy... malicious... a holder of wrong views because of what was done in the past.' When one falls back on what was done in the past as being essential, monks, there is no desire, no effort [at the thought], 'This should be done. This shouldn't be done.' When one can't pin down as a truth or reality what should & shouldn't be done, one dwells bewildered & unprotected. One cannot righteously refer to oneself as a contemplative. This was my first righteous refutation of those brahmans & contemplatives who hold to such teachings, such views.
Not saying anyone is arguing this - just putting it out there because I think it is pertinent to the discussion.

:anjali:

Re: The causes for wisdom

Posted: Fri Jan 25, 2013 12:15 pm
by equilibrium
robertk wrote:Is there a conventional self who decides?
Conventional self is the same as a deluded self, a self that is fabricated by wrong views.....all based on believe supported by the deluded mind.
A decision can be made either one is deluded or not. As the mind is deluded, one cannot be certain ones decisions are right.

Was it not the Buddha noted the followings:
That to admit oneself is deluded is a wise man.....and for one who does not admit oneself is deluded is in fact a fool.

Now if we were to travel to the other side where one is not deluded or have reached Nibbana, one must be able to see this former deluded/fabricated self that only exist by the mind.....yet there is nothing to be found.
Yet the word "self" is just a word we use to say there is something that can be found or tracked down but as the teaching suggest it is empty.....therefore it cannot be found which corresponds.
The "conventional self" is only there because the deluded mind is supporting it.....it clings and cannot let go because the mind believes in it.....wonderful don't you think?

Re: is there a conventional self who decides?

Posted: Fri Jan 25, 2013 2:04 pm
by beeblebrox
equilibrium wrote: The "conventional self" is only there because the deluded mind is supporting it.....it clings and cannot let go because the mind believes in it.....wonderful don't you think?
When someone says, "I am going to do this," do you think:
"That poor person is deluded... I think I should say something about it to him, because I have a deep compassion."
or:
"I see some conditions that are coming together right now... and I think that this will cause something."
:?:

Personally, I think I will go with the 2nd one in my own practice.

:anjali:

Re: The causes for wisdom

Posted: Fri Jan 25, 2013 3:09 pm
by kirk5a
robertk wrote:
kirk5a wrote:Who decided to start this thread? Robert. Case closed.
Ok but since there have been other posts after your one I guess some members thought there was still some opening in the case.

Let's look at when I decided to begin this thread . Is there really an "I" or is that merely a conventional and useful description of a complex set of processes?
That wasn't the question of this thread. You asked about "conventional." That means, for example, if you were in a court of law and you were asked, did you, Robert, start this thread? You would say, yes. You would not start talking about the aggregates and the factors arising momentarily and passing away. Not just because the court wouldn't understand you, but because any other answer other than "Yes I started this thread" would be a lie. You, robert, did this. That is "conventional self."

Re: The causes for wisdom

Posted: Fri Jan 25, 2013 4:04 pm
by robertk
kirk5a wrote:
robertk wrote:
kirk5a wrote:Who decided to start this thread? Robert. Case closed.
Ok but since there have been other posts after your one I guess some members thought there was still some opening in the case.

Let's look at when I decided to begin this thread . Is there really an "I" or is that merely a conventional and useful description of a complex set of processes?
That wasn't the question of this thread. You asked about "conventional." That means, for example, if you were in a court of law and you were asked, did you, Robert, start this thread? You would say, yes. You would not start talking about the aggregates and the factors arising momentarily and passing away. Not just because the court wouldn't understand you, but because any other answer other than "Yes I started this thread" would be a lie. You, robert, did this. That is "conventional self."
Thanks for that. As my purpose in starting this thread was to bring out some Dhamma points I guess the lawyers on both sides must be happy. I take it you agree with these quotes:

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

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

"XVII31The mental and material (nama rupa) are really here
But here is no human being to be found, for it is void and merely fashioned like a doll"

with regard to choosing:

Visuddhimagga says (xvii312)

"
The absence of interestedness on the part of ignorance, such as 'Formations [sankhara] must be made to occur by me, or on the part of formations, such as 'vinnana must be made to ocur by us'. One who sees this rightly abandons self view by understanding the absence of a maker."

Re: The causes for wisdom

Posted: Fri Jan 25, 2013 4:23 pm
by kirk5a
robertk wrote: Thanks for that. As my purpose in starting this thread was to bring out some Dhamma points I guess the lawyers on both sides must be happy. I take it you agree with these quotes:
These quotes are not talking about the question of what is, conventionally speaking, "myself." So again, they are not especially relevant to the topic.

Which, just to be clear: conventionally speaking - just this very body+mind sitting typing away at this computer, given a name at birth, is me. It's not you. You are a different person, a different body+mind.