vinasp wrote:1. What is the background to these questions, and how should they be understood?
The cosmologist (lokayata) schools of thought reasoned from what they saw as the basic principles of the physical cosmos in formulating their teachings on how life should be lived. In modern times, they would correspond to those who base their philosophies on principles drawn from the physical sciences, such as evolutionary biology or quantum physics. Although the cosmologists of India in the Buddha's time differed on first principles, they tended to be more unanimous in using their first principles — whatever they were — to argue for hedonism as the best approach to life.
vinasp wrote:2. What is meant by "all"?
vinasp wrote:3. What is meant by:"without veering towards either of these extremes"?
"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.
"By & large, Kaccayana, this world is in bondage to attachments, clingings (sustenances), & biases. But one such as this does not get involved with or cling to these attachments, clingings, fixations of awareness, biases, or obsessions; nor is he resolved on 'my self.' He has no uncertainty or doubt that just stress, when arising, is arising; stress, when passing away, is passing away. In this, his knowledge is independent of others. It's to this extent, Kaccayana, that there is right view.
vinasp wrote:4. In what way does Dependent Origination represent an answer to the questions posed?
"'Everything exists': That is one extreme. 'Everything doesn't exist': That is a second extreme. Avoiding these two extremes, the Tathagata teaches the Dhamma via the middle: From ignorance as a requisite condition come fabrications. etc.
Amaro wrote: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.
Another of the highly significant expressions of this same balancing point of
the Middle Way comes in the Collection on Causation in the Saμyutta Nikaya:
[SN 12.15 Kaccaayanagotto Sutta]
Nanananda wrote:It is clear from this declaration that in this context the law of
dependent arising itself is called the middle path. Some prefer
to call this the Buddha's metaphysical middle path, as it avoids
both extremes of `is' and `is not'. The philosophical implica-
tions of the above passage lead to the conclusion that the law
of dependent arising enshrines a certain pragmatic principle,
which dissolves the antinomian conflict in the world.
Passano wrote:... there are other instances where the Buddha defines the Middle Way as a
precise approach that cuts through the continuum entirely. This is especially apparent
in passages where he discusses the Middle Way in terms, not of behavior or
motivation, but of Right View.
Bodhi wrote:Dependent origination offers a radically different perspective that transcends the two extremes. It shows that individual existence is constituted by a current of conditioned phenomena devoid of metaphysical self yet continuing on from birth to birth as long as the causes that sustain it remain effective. Dependent origination thereby offers a cogent explanation of the problem of suffering that on the one hand avoids the philosophical dilemmas posed by the hypothesis of a permanent self, and on the other avoids the dangers of ethical anarchy to which annihilationism eventually leads. As long as ignorance and craving remain, the process of rebirth continues; kamma yields its pleasant and painful fruit, and the great mass of suffering accumulates. When ignorance and craving are destroyed, the inner mechanism of karmic causation is deactivated, and one reaches the end of suffering in samsara. Perhaps the most elegant exposition of dependent origination as the "middle teaching" is the famous Kaccanogotta sutta.
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
vinasp wrote: 4. Perhaps some other option.
Users browsing this forum: dhammapal and 7 guests