With wrong view or without wrong view?

Discussion of Abhidhamma and related Commentaries
Post Reply
SarathW
Posts: 21184
Joined: Mon Sep 10, 2012 2:49 am

With wrong view or without wrong view?

Post by SarathW »

This is a very important teaching of Buddha and not directly discussed in this forum.
================
Page 28:
http://www.buddhanet.net/pdf_file/abhidhamma.pdf
(Consciousness Rooted in Attachment)
1. One consciousness, unprompted, accompanied
by pleasure, and connected with wrong view,
2. One consciousness, prompted, accompanied by
pleasure, and connected with wrong view,
3. One consciousness, unprompted, accompanied
by pleasure, and disconnected with wrong view,
4. One consciousness, prompted, accompanied by
pleasure, and disconnected with wrong view,
5. One consciousness, unprompted, accompanied
Etc.
============================
The way I understand, this is a very important teaching and will answer most of difficult questions. Eg. Can I kill someone for self defence?
Evan Sotapanna does unwholesome kamma but disconnected with wrong view.
It appear however the weight of wholesome kamma or unwholesome kamma vary with the action done with wrong view or without wrong view.

=========================
This matter also discussed here.
AN 3.99: Lonaphala Sutta wrote:"Suppose that a man were to drop a salt crystal into a small amount of water in a cup. What do you think? Would the water in the cup become salty because of the salt crystal, and unfit to drink?"

"Yes, lord. Why is that? There being only a small amount of water in the cup, it would become salty because of the salt crystal, and unfit to drink."

"Now suppose that a man were to drop a salt crystal into the River Ganges. What do you think? Would the water in the River Ganges become salty because of the salt crystal, and unfit to drink?"

"No, lord. Why is that? There being a great mass of water in the River Ganges, it would not become salty because of the salt crystal or unfit to drink."

"In the same way, there is the case where a trifling evil deed done by one individual [the first] takes him to hell; and there is the case where the very same sort of trifling deed done by the other individual is experienced in the here & now, and for the most part barely appears for a moment.

'Now, a trifling evil act done by what sort of individual takes him to hell? There is the case where a certain individual is undeveloped in the body, [2] undeveloped in virtue, undeveloped in mind [i.e., painful feelings can invade the mind and stay there], undeveloped in discernment: restricted, small-hearted, dwelling with suffering. A trifling evil act done by this sort of individual takes him to hell.

'Now, a trifling evil act done by what sort of individual is experienced in the here & now, and for the most part barely appears for a moment? There is the case where a certain individual is developed in the body,[3] developed in virtue, developed in mind [i.e., painful feelings cannot invade the mind and stay there], developed in discernment: unrestricted, large-hearted, dwelling with the immeasurable. A trifling evil act done by this sort of individual is experienced in the here & now, and for the most part barely appears for a moment.

================================
What is your understanding about this topic?
“As the lamp consumes oil, the path realises Nibbana”
culaavuso
Posts: 1363
Joined: Sat Jan 11, 2014 8:27 pm

Re: With wrong view or without wrong view?

Post by culaavuso »

Unwholesome kamma is not all equal. A sotapanna may perform unwholesome kamma, but only in regards to minor training rules and not the main precepts.

AN 10.92 says a stream entrant refrains from taking life (and follows the other five precepts)
AN 10.92: Vera Sutta wrote: Then Anathapindika the householder went to the Blessed One and, on arrival, having bowed down to the Blessed One, sat to one side. As he was sitting there, the Blessed One said to him, "When, for a disciple of the noble ones, five forms of fear & animosity are stilled; when he is endowed with the four factors of stream-entry; and when, through discernment, he has rightly seen & rightly ferreted out the noble method, then if he wants he may state about himself: 'Hell is ended; animal wombs are ended; the state of the hungry shades is ended; states of deprivation, destitution, the bad bourns are ended! I am a stream-winner, steadfast, never again destined for states of woe, headed for self-awakening!'

"Now, which five forms of fear & animosity are stilled?

"When a person takes life, then with the taking of life as a requisite condition, he produces fear & animosity in the here & now, produces fear & animosity in future lives, experiences mental concomitants of pain & despair; but when he refrains from taking life, he neither produces fear & animosity in the here & now nor does he produce fear & animosity in future lives, nor does he experience mental concomitants of pain & despair: for one who refrains from taking life, that fear & animosity is thus stilled.
...
He is endowed with virtues that are appealing to the noble ones: untorn, unbroken, unspotted, unsplattered, liberating, praised by the wise, untarnished, leading to concentration.
AN 3.87
AN 3.87 wrote: Here, bhikkhus, the bhikkhu becomes complete, observing the virtues and complete to a lesser degree in concentration and wisdom. He transgresses certain minor precepts and eventually emerges from them. What is the reason? Bhikkhus, saying it correctly it would happen. Of the main precepts dealing with the holy life and conducive to the holy life he is fixed and firm. He destroys the three bonds and reducing his greed, hate and delusion becomes one who returns to this world once more to make an end of unpleasantness.
AN 3.87 (Thanissaro Bhikkhu trans.) wrote: There is the case where a monk is wholly accomplished in virtue, moderately accomplished in concentration, and moderately accomplished in discernment. With reference to the lesser and minor training rules, he falls into offenses and rehabilitates himself. Why is that? Because I have not declared that to be a disqualification in these circumstances. But as for the training rules that are basic to the holy life and proper to the holy life, he is one of permanent virtue, one of steadfast virtue. Having undertaken them, he trains in reference to the training rules. With the wasting away of [the first] three fetters, he is a stream-winner, never again destined for states of woe, certain, headed for self-awakening.
In This Very Life: Liberation Teachings of the Buddha by U Pandita says:
U Pandita wrote: Morality is purity of conduct with respect to the five precepts. It is said that a stream entrant is incapable of deliberately breaking them, incapable of any wrong thoughts or actions leading to rebirth in states of woe.
...
The third and fourth properties, hiri and ottappa, we explained earlier. A stream entrant has these two aspects of conscience very strongly developed, and so will be incapable of performing bad deeds.
SarathW
Posts: 21184
Joined: Mon Sep 10, 2012 2:49 am

Re: With wrong view or without wrong view?

Post by SarathW »

Sadhu,Sadhu,Sadhu

But I have read, that a person doing a wrong act with the knowledge that he is doing something wrong has less kamma effect.
Say, I know killing is bad but I killed my enemy with self defence.
My question is why Abhidamma went into all this trouble to have this 12 types of immoral consciousness.
:)
“As the lamp consumes oil, the path realises Nibbana”
culaavuso
Posts: 1363
Joined: Sat Jan 11, 2014 8:27 pm

Re: With wrong view or without wrong view?

Post by culaavuso »

SarathW wrote: My question is why Abhidamma went into all this trouble to have this 12 types of immoral consciousness.
Consider the case of the minor training rules being violated (a wrong act) while mindful of the process and aware of the drawbacks (right view), such as enjoying the sensual pleasure of good tasting food while knowing that seeking sensual pleasures is unskillful. With this awareness while eating, the future results will be lessened. The craving that arises in the future as a result of the pleasant feeling will be diminished by the contemplation of the drawbacks associated with the act. The unskillful act can even serve as a basis for insight into why it's unskillful and how to train to avoid it in the future by observing the cause and effect involved in the mental states of unskillful behavior and its results as those situations occur.

Compare this with seeking sensual pleasure in good tasting food without any sense restraint and without any thought as to the unskillfulness of the act. This will lead to deeper feelings of pleasure from the taste. This creates a danger of physical pains from overeating and a danger of stronger cravings in the future as a result of the stronger feeling of pleasure and the inappropriate attention given to those feelings of pleasure while being unaware of the drawbacks.

In MN 13 it is recommended to fully understand the allure and the drawbacks of such experiences in order to cultivate the motivation and capability for escape.
SarathW
Posts: 21184
Joined: Mon Sep 10, 2012 2:49 am

Re: With wrong view or without wrong view?

Post by SarathW »

Thanks
Any Sutta reference for " unprompted, accompanied
by pleasure" etc.?
:thinking:
“As the lamp consumes oil, the path realises Nibbana”
culaavuso
Posts: 1363
Joined: Sat Jan 11, 2014 8:27 pm

Re: With wrong view or without wrong view?

Post by culaavuso »

SarathW wrote:Any Sutta reference for " unprompted, accompanied
It seems prompted vs unprompted is a matter of effort being present or not. Thus, in an unprompted state of mind there is no effort but in a prompted state of mind there is either Right Effort or Wrong Effort.

SN 45.8
SN 45.8: Magga-vibhanga Sutta wrote: And what, monks, is right effort? (i) There is the case where a monk generates desire, endeavors, activates persistence, upholds & exerts his intent for the sake of the non-arising of evil, unskillful qualities that have not yet arisen. (ii) He generates desire, endeavors, activates persistence, upholds & exerts his intent for the sake of the abandonment of evil, unskillful qualities that have arisen. (iii) He generates desire, endeavors, activates persistence, upholds & exerts his intent for the sake of the arising of skillful qualities that have not yet arisen. (iv) He generates desire, endeavors, activates persistence, upholds & exerts his intent for the maintenance, non-confusion, increase, plenitude, development, & culmination of skillful qualities that have arisen: This, monks, is called right effort.
It seems this "generates desire, endeavors, activates persistence, upholds and exerts" corresponds to the prompting.

Accompanied by pleasure/indifference/displeasure seems to be the three feelings of vedana from the standard formula of dependent origination.

SN 36.22
SN 36.22: Atthasata Sutta wrote: And which are the three feelings? A feeling of pleasure, a feeling of pain, a feeling of neither pleasure nor pain. These are the three feelings.
DN 15
DN 15: Maha-nidana Sutta wrote: "'From feeling as a requisite condition comes craving.' Thus it has been said. And this is the way to understand how from feeling as a requisite condition comes craving. If there were no feeling at all, in any way, of anything anywhere — i.e., feeling born of contact at the eye, feeling born of contact at the ear, feeling born of contact at the nose, feeling born of contact at the tongue, feeling born of contact at the body, or feeling born of contact at the intellect — in the utter absence of feeling, from the cessation of feeling, would craving be discerned?"

"No, lord."

"Thus this is a cause, this is a reason, this is an origination, this is a requisite condition for craving, i.e., feeling.
...
"'From contact as a requisite condition comes feeling.' Thus it has been said. And this is the way to understand how from contact as a requisite condition comes feeling. If there were no contact at all, in any way, of anything anywhere — i.e., contact at the eye, contact at the ear, contact at the nose, contact at the tongue, contact at the body, or contact at the intellect — in the utter absence of contact, from the cessation of contact, would feeling be discerned?"

"No, lord."

"Thus this is a cause, this is a reason, this is an origination, this is a requisite condition for feeling, i.e., contact.
User avatar
Mkoll
Posts: 6590
Joined: Wed Dec 05, 2012 6:55 pm
Location: USA

Re: With wrong view or without wrong view?

Post by Mkoll »

SarathW wrote:\But I have read, that a person doing a wrong act with the knowledge that he is doing something wrong has less kamma effect.
I think so. The wiser and more advanced one is on the Path, the less the repurcussions of an improper act affect one. I infer this from this excerpt from AN 3.99.
"Suppose that a man were to drop a salt crystal into a small amount of water in a cup. What do you think? Would the water in the cup become salty because of the salt crystal, and unfit to drink?"

"Yes, lord. Why is that? There being only a small amount of water in the cup, it would become salty because of the salt crystal, and unfit to drink."

"Now suppose that a man were to drop a salt crystal into the River Ganges. What do you think? Would the water in the River Ganges become salty because of the salt crystal, and unfit to drink?"

"No, lord. Why is that? There being a great mass of water in the River Ganges, it would not become salty because of the salt crystal or unfit to drink."

"In the same way, there is the case where a trifling evil deed done by one individual [the first] takes him to hell; and there is the case where the very same sort of trifling deed done by the other individual is experienced in the here & now, and for the most part barely appears for a moment.
AN 3.99
Namo tassa bhagavato arahato samma sambuddhassa
Namo tassa bhagavato arahato samma sambuddhassa
Namo tassa bhagavato arahato samma sambuddhassa
binocular
Posts: 8292
Joined: Sat Jan 17, 2009 11:13 pm

Re: With wrong view or without wrong view?

Post by binocular »

SarathW wrote:But I have read, that a person doing a wrong act with the knowledge that he is doing something wrong has less kamma effect.
In my experience, it is just the opposite.
culaavuso wrote:Consider the case of the minor training rules being violated (a wrong act) while mindful of the process and aware of the drawbacks (right view), such as enjoying the sensual pleasure of good tasting food while knowing that seeking sensual pleasures is unskillful. With this awareness while eating, the future results will be lessened.
The craving that arises in the future as a result of the pleasant feeling will be diminished by the contemplation of the drawbacks associated with the act. The unskillful act can even serve as a basis for insight into why it's unskillful and how to train to avoid it in the future by observing the cause and effect involved in the mental states of unskillful behavior and its results as those situations occur.
I can agree with the underlined part.

But generally, doing something I believe to be wrong will have worse negative consequences. At least in terms of feeling a lot of shame, guilt, and mistakes born out of these states.

Also, I've heard - although from some Hindus - that the same wrong action, if performed by a person higher up in the spiritual hierarchy, will have worse consequences than if performed by a lower person.
For example, if a monk steals food, that is worse than if an ordinary person would steal food.
Hic Rhodus, hic salta!
User avatar
mikenz66
Posts: 19932
Joined: Sat Jan 10, 2009 7:37 am
Location: Aotearoa, New Zealand

Re: With wrong view or without wrong view?

Post by mikenz66 »

SarathW wrote: But I have read, that a person doing a wrong act with the knowledge that he is doing something wrong has less kamma effect.
This does seem to be the usual interpretation. The logic being that someone doing something unskilful without realising it will not have any inclination to stop doing it and will repeat the action, and it will become a habit. Also, someone reluctantly doing an action known to be unskilful will generally strive to minimise the consequences.

I can't find an appropriate sutta quote, but see this from the Milindapañha:
The king asked: "Venerable Nagasena, for whom is the greater demerit, one who knowingly does evil, or one who does evil unknowingly?"

The elder replied: "Indeed, your majesty, for him who does evil not knowing is the greater demerit."

"In that case, venerable Nagasena, would we doubly punish one who is our prince or king's chief minister who not knowing does evil?"

"What do you think, your majesty, who would get burned more, one who knowing picks up a hot iron ball, ablaze and glowing, or one who not knowing picks it up?"

"Indeed, venerable sir, he who not knowing picks it up would get burned more."

"Indeed, your majesty, in the same way the greater demerit is for him who does evil not knowing."

"You are clever, venerable Nagasena."
http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka ... iln-3-7-08
and here:
http://dhammawheel.com/viewtopic.php?f=13&t=13926

:anjali:
Mike
SarathW
Posts: 21184
Joined: Mon Sep 10, 2012 2:49 am

Re: With wrong view or without wrong view?

Post by SarathW »

Joseph Goldstein discuss why doing unwholesome action with the knowledge is better.

http://www.dharmaseed.org/teacher/96/talk/298/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
“As the lamp consumes oil, the path realises Nibbana”
User avatar
retrofuturist
Posts: 27839
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 9:52 pm
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Contact:

Re: With wrong view or without wrong view?

Post by retrofuturist »

Greetings,

This may or may not be what Mike was looking for, but it's related...

AN 3.99: Lonaphala Sutta
http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka ... .than.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Metta,
Retro. :)
"Whatever is true, whatever is noble, whatever is right, whatever is pure, whatever is lovely, whatever is admirable—if anything is excellent or praiseworthy—think about such things."
dhamma follower
Posts: 354
Joined: Fri Nov 06, 2009 5:48 am

Re: With wrong view or without wrong view?

Post by dhamma follower »

Hi SarathW,
SarathW wrote:Thanks
Any Sutta reference for " unprompted, accompanied
by pleasure" etc.?
:thinking:
From the footnote to Abhidhammatthasangaha:
12. Sankhārika-


This is purely a technical term used in a specific sense in the Abhidhamma. It is formed of 'sam', well and Ö 'kar', to do, to prepare, to accomplish. Literally, it means accomplishing, preparing, arranging.



Like dhamma, sankhāra also is a multi-significant term. Its precise meaning is to be understood according to the context.



When used as one of the five 'aggregates' (pañcakkhandha), it refers to all the mental states, except vedanā and saññā. In the paticca-samuppāda it is applied to all moral and immoral activities, good and bad thoughts. When sankhāra is used to signify that which is subject to change, sorrow, etc., it is invariably applied to all conditioned things.



In this particular instance the term is used with 'sa' = co-; and a = un, Sa-sankhārika (lit., with effort) is that which is prompted, instigated, or induced by oneself or by another. 'Asankhārika' (lit., without effort) is that which is thus unaffected, but done spontaneously.



If, for instance, one does an act, induced by another, or after much deliberation or premeditation on one's part, then it is sa-sankhārika. If, on the contrary, one does it instantly without any external or internal inducement, or any premeditation, then it is asankhārika.
and
10. Vedanā or Feeling-

Feeling or, as some prefer to say, sensation, is a mental state common to all types of consciousness. Chiefly there are three kinds of feelings -namely,

somanassa (pleasurable),
domanassa (displeasurable),
upekkhā (indifferent, neutral, equanimity or neither pleasurable nor dis-pleasurable).
With

dukkha (physical pain)
sukha (physical happiness)
there are altogether five kinds of feelings.



Somanassa is an abstract noun formed of 'su', good, and 'mana', mind. Literally, the term means good-mindedness, i.e., a pleasurable feeling.

Similarly 'domanassa' ('du', bad, and 'mana', mind) means bad-mindedness i.e., a dis-pleasurable feeling.

The third feeling is neutral. Indifference is used here in this particular sense, but not in the sense of callousness. Sukha is composed of 'su', easy, and 'kha' to bear, or to endure. What is easily endured is 'sukha' i.e., happiness. Dukkha (du, difficult), pain, is that which is difficult to be endured. Both these sensations are physical.

According to Abhidhamma there is only one type of consciousness accompanied by pain, and one accompanied by happiness. Two are connected with a dis-pleasurable feeling. Of the 89 types of consciousness, in the remaining 85 are found either a pleasurable feeling or a neutral feeling.



Somanassa, domanassa, and upekkhā are purely mental. Sukha and dukkha are purely physical. This is the reason why there is no upekkhā in the case of touch which, according to Abhidhamma, must be either happy or painful. (See Upekkhā, Note. 42)
http://www.palikanon.com/english/sangaha/chapter_1.htm" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Rgds,

D.F
dhamma follower
Posts: 354
Joined: Fri Nov 06, 2009 5:48 am

Re: With wrong view or without wrong view?

Post by dhamma follower »

culaavuso wrote:
SarathW wrote:Any Sutta reference for " unprompted, accompanied
It seems prompted vs unprompted is a matter of effort being present or not. Thus, in an unprompted state of mind there is no effort but in a prompted state of mind there is either Right Effort or Wrong Effort.
Actually, according to the Abhidhamma, effort is a mental factor which arises in both the prompted and unprompted citta. It arises with 73 kinds of cittas, including of all kinds of wholesome or unwholesome cittas among them the cittas prompted and unprompted.

One way of explaining the meaning of "prompted" and unprompted" that I've read is that they refer to different degrees of citta. For example, you know that there's good movie, but don't have a strong enough desire to go. But then a friend asks you to come along, you happily accepts. In that case the citta with attachment (to see the movie) is said to be prompted. In another situation, when you hear about a movie that you really want to see, you set yourself ready to go, without being instigated by anyone. In that case, the citta with attachment is said to be unprompted. In the later case, the attachment is said to be stronger than in the former.

Right effort or wrong effort depends on the other mental factors co-arising with it. In the case of unwholesome cittas like cittas with attachment, with hatred and ignorance, they all arise with wrong effort, be them prompted or unprompted

On the other hand, with all cittas that are wholesome, whether prompted or unprompted, they arise with right effort. But it is the right effort of the Eight Noble Fold Path only when it is accompanied by right view or panna (wisdom)

Rgds,

D.F
SarathW
Posts: 21184
Joined: Mon Sep 10, 2012 2:49 am

Re: With wrong view or without wrong view?

Post by SarathW »

Even if you have to do an evil deed, do it with remorse!

http://www.tipitaka.net/tipitaka/dhp/ve ... ?verse=157" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
“As the lamp consumes oil, the path realises Nibbana”
Post Reply