Some observations on your post of Mon Jan 23, 2012 11:47 pm.
My comments are in brackets [ .... ]
Ajahn Pasanno & Ajahn Amaro wrote:
“And how, bhikkhus, do some hold back? Some devas and
humans enjoy being, delight in being, are satisfied with being.
When the Dhamma is taught to them for the cessation of being,
their minds do not enter into it or acquire confidence in it or
settle upon it or become resolved upon it. Thus, bhikkhus, do
some hold back."
[ Note: "... for the cessation of being."]
“How, bhikkhus, do those with vision see? Herein one sees what
has come to be as having come to be. Having seen it thus, one
practises the course for turning away, for dispassion, for the
cessation of what has come to be. Thus, bhikkhus, do those with
[ "For the cessation of what has come to be." For the complete,
permanent cessation of all that has come to be. Which is
represented by all twelve links of DO.]
[The quotations from Iti 49, are of course correct. But they appear
to misinterpret them as "patterns of experience."]
Lastly, in the culmination of the process, there is the remainderless relinquishment of all experience. There is a complete acceptance of all that
arises and no confusion about the fact that all patterns of experience are of
the same dependent, insubstantial nature.
[What do they mean by: "the relinquishment of all experience"? "... a complete
acceptance of all that arises .."? or "... that all patterns of experience
are of the same dependent, insubstantial nature"?
How can one relinquish all experience? None of the things in DO arise
any more - they have ceased. There is nothing dependent about experience,
the Buddha still sees forms with the eye, even after all DO links have
The evidence for ‘being’ (the arising of things) is seen and seen through, the
evidence for ‘non-being’ (the cessation of things) is seen and seen through; both are thus let go of through perfect understanding, and the heart experiences release.
[ I can make no sense of this.]
10. ‘Existence’ is the grasping at permanence; ‘non-existence’ is
the view of annihilation. Therefore, the wise do not dwell, in
existence or non-existence.
[ Is this a real quote from Nagarjuna? Yes, there is a stage on the path
where the eternalist view, and the annihilationist view are both given
up. But that still leaves the present apparent self to be dealt with.]
[ I do not think that Nagarjuna is of any help in understanding the
teachings of the Sutta Pitaka. Also, Nanananda seems to misunderstand
things in a very similar way.]