The Lokayata Discourses

A discussion on all aspects of Theravāda Buddhism
chownah
Posts: 9336
Joined: Wed Aug 12, 2009 2:19 pm

Re: The Lokayata Discourses

Post by chownah »

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
ceased.]
My views: "the relinquishment of all experience" means not attaching to experience. I was going to say "not attaching to any experience" but then I realized that this might be taken to mean that experience comes in lumps or pieces as if it was an object but it is not....it is a process at most so I decided to go with "not attaching to experience" to stress the non-object ness of experience.
"complete acceptance of all that arises" is like "the relinquishment of all experience" but complete acceptance emphasizes non-aversion.
"all patterns of experience" I take to mean all fabrications and I take "are of athe same dependent, insubstantial nature" to mean that they all are dependently co-arisen and are ephemeral and lacking in inate substance.
It is the "self" which tries to capture experience and to mold it to its own ends and which will not relinquish experience....it is the "self" which does not want to accept things as they are but would rather create a delusional view to give the appearance it desires....it is the "self" which is one pattern of experience which must be seen as being dependent on conditions and is insubstantial in nature.
The middle way is to neither view the "self" as existing nor to view the "self" as not existing but rather to have no doctrine of "self" whatever.

My views only....
chownah
vinasp
Posts: 1675
Joined: Tue Aug 18, 2009 7:49 pm
Location: Bristol. United Kingdom.

Re: The Lokayata Discourses

Post by vinasp »

Hi Mike,

To quote Nanananda from the SN 12.15 thread:

"The noble disciple sees the arising and the cessation
of the world through his own six sense bases."

How is this possible? The world only arises once, and only ceases once.
And when it ceases the six-spheres also cease.

It seems that he is confusing the six-spheres with the actual sense
organs - along with everyone else.

Regards, Vincent.
vinasp
Posts: 1675
Joined: Tue Aug 18, 2009 7:49 pm
Location: Bristol. United Kingdom.

Re: The Lokayata Discourses

Post by vinasp »

Hi chownah,

You say:

"My views: "the relinquishment of all experience" means not attaching to experience. I was going to say "not attaching to any experience" but then I realized that this might be taken to mean that experience comes in lumps or pieces as if it was an object but it is not....it is a process at most so I decided to go with "not attaching to experience" to stress the non-object ness of experience."

How can anyone cling to experience? It is not possible. What people are
clinging to is a mind-fabricated representation of some experience. In
this sense it is indeed an object. All clinging is clinging to something.
There must be an object.

More to follow, regards, Vincent.
User avatar
kirk5a
Posts: 1959
Joined: Thu Sep 23, 2010 1:51 pm

Re: The Lokayata Discourses

Post by kirk5a »

vinasp wrote: 4. Perhaps some other option.
Awake, not clinging to notions of any sort. A.k.a. "living the holy life"
"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
vinasp
Posts: 1675
Joined: Tue Aug 18, 2009 7:49 pm
Location: Bristol. United Kingdom.

Re: The Lokayata Discourses

Post by vinasp »

Hi chownah,

You say:

"The middle way is to neither view the "self" as existing nor to view the "self" as not existing but rather to have no doctrine of "self" whatever.

And where in the Sutta Pitaka does it say this?

The monks are constantly instructed not to regard anything as self - why?
Because they already regard many things as self, or related to self, and
that way of regarding things must be removed. It is a deeply ingrained
habit that usually takes some time to remove.

Regards, Vincent.
chownah
Posts: 9336
Joined: Wed Aug 12, 2009 2:19 pm

Re: The Lokayata Discourses

Post by chownah »

vinasp wrote: How can anyone cling to experience? It is not possible. What people are
clinging to is a mind-fabricated representation of some experience. In
this sense it is indeed an object. All clinging is clinging to something.
There must be an object.

More to follow, regards, Vincent.
I think that experience here is comprised of the clinging aggregates or encompasses the clinging aggregates and so would indeed be subject to clinging.....
My views only....
chownah
vinasp
Posts: 1675
Joined: Tue Aug 18, 2009 7:49 pm
Location: Bristol. United Kingdom.

Re: The Lokayata Discourses

Post by vinasp »

Hi chownah,

Quote: I think that experience here is comprised of the clinging aggregates or encompasses the clinging aggregates and so would indeed be subject to clinging...

What has to be given up, is everything that we are clinging to. This is,
of course, the five clinging aggregates. But, for me, these five clinging
aggregates have nothing to do with sense experience.

I suspect that my understanding of the aggregates is very different to
your understanding. This is a large and complex topic, which I would
prefer not to go into on this thread.

If you are interested in discussing them, I will be pleased to participate
on another thread.

Regards, Vincent.
vinasp
Posts: 1675
Joined: Tue Aug 18, 2009 7:49 pm
Location: Bristol. United Kingdom.

Re: The Lokayata Discourses

Post by vinasp »

Hi kirk5a,

Quote: Awake, not clinging to notions of any sort. A.k.a. "living the holy life"

Just show me any discourse where the Buddha instructs his monks
to "... not cling to notions of any sort."

It looks more like the teaching of Nagarjuna, originating about
500 years after the Buddha.

Regards, Vincent.
Last edited by vinasp on Thu Feb 02, 2012 7:25 am, edited 1 time in total.
vinasp
Posts: 1675
Joined: Tue Aug 18, 2009 7:49 pm
Location: Bristol. United Kingdom.

Re: The Lokayata Discourses

Post by vinasp »

Hi everyone,

What is this "world" that ceases?

1. World - loka.
2. Suffering - dukkha.
3. "Death" - mara.
4. A being - satta.
5. The five aggregates of clinging.
6. "Identity" - sakkaya.

These are all the same thing, and represent what has ceased when
the noble eightfold path has been completed.

The six-spheres (salayatana) have also ceased. The understanding of
the six-spheres as being the actual senses is not wrong. But there is
an alternative way to understand them. In this alternative, all twelve
spheres (six "internal" and six "external") have ceased. So one is not
required to understand the six spheres as being the actual six senses.

Therefore, this "world" has nothing to do with sense experience, and
sense experience continues after this "world" ceases.

What is the simplest way to understand this "world"? It is everything
that we are clinging to. Where these "things" are mind-fabricated
objects. Think of them as just being misunderstandings of things.

Regards, Vincent.
chownah
Posts: 9336
Joined: Wed Aug 12, 2009 2:19 pm

Re: The Lokayata Discourses

Post by chownah »

vinasp wrote:Hi chownah,

Quote: I think that experience here is comprised of the clinging aggregates or encompasses the clinging aggregates and so would indeed be subject to clinging...

What has to be given up, is everything that we are clinging to. This is,
of course, the five clinging aggregates. But, for me, these five clinging
aggregates have nothing to do with sense experience.

I suspect that my understanding of the aggregates is very different to
your understanding. This is a large and complex topic, which I would
prefer not to go into on this thread.

If you are interested in discussing them, I will be pleased to participate
on another thread.

Regards, Vincent.
vinasp,
I think that not only do our views on aggregates are very different but also our views on experience are very different. Thanks for the offer to discuss the aggregates but I'm pretty satisfied with my present understanding in that my present understanding allows me to make sense of many of the things you are questioning.
You say, "What has to be given up, is everything that we are clinging to", to me the idea "the relinquishment of all experience" means we need to give up experience and so from what you say it must be something that we are clinging to or else why would the Buddha say to give it up?...put another way, the Buddha says to give up experience; you say what has to be given up is what we cling to....therefore experience must be something we cling to....I guess.....the only disconnect I see here is you inability to see experience as something that can be clung to.....for me it is obvious that experience is something that can be clung to. Do people cling to life?....from your viewpoint is that impossible just like clinging to experience is impossible?
chownah
vinasp
Posts: 1675
Joined: Tue Aug 18, 2009 7:49 pm
Location: Bristol. United Kingdom.

Re: The Lokayata Discourses

Post by vinasp »

Hi everyone,

Ajahn Buddhadasa wrote an interesting essay called: "Everyday
Language and Dhamma Language." It can be found in many books
which include a selection of his writings.

It is also available on-line from many sites, for example:

http://www.theravada-dhamma.org/blog/?p=8185" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Regards, Vincent.
User avatar
kirk5a
Posts: 1959
Joined: Thu Sep 23, 2010 1:51 pm

Re: The Lokayata Discourses

Post by kirk5a »

vinasp wrote:Hi kirk5a,

Quote: Awake, not clinging to notions of any sort. A.k.a. "living the holy life"

Just show me any discourse where the Buddha instructs his monks
to "... not cling to notions of any sort."

It looks more like the teaching of Nagarjuna, originating about
500 years after the Buddha.

Regards, Vincent.
That was not a verbatim quote from somewhere. The Buddha certainly taught wakefulness (sati) and non-clinging to what is seen, heard, sensed or cognized. That includes not clinging to mental notions such as "there is no self."

But as for quotations, how about this one?
Concerning the seen, the heard and the cognized he does not form the least notion. That brahmana[2] who does not grasp at a view, with what could he be identified in the world?
http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka ... .irel.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
"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
vinasp
Posts: 1675
Joined: Tue Aug 18, 2009 7:49 pm
Location: Bristol. United Kingdom.

Re: The Lokayata Discourses

Post by vinasp »

Hi kirk5a,

Your original statement was:

"Awake, not clinging to notions of any sort. A.k.a. "living the holy life"

My response was:

"Just show me any discourse where the Buddha instructs his monks
to "... not cling to notions of any sort."

That was a bad response by me. The Buddha does certainly say that nothing
should be clung to, and that includes ideas or notions.

If we could stop clinging to the idea of self - just like that - Then
we would be enlightened. But it is not that easy, because the clinging
is a deep-rooted habit. It takes the entire noble eightfold path to
remove this view of self.

The question really, is - What is right view for those on the path?

My opinion is that right view is the view - "there is no self", which
is used to remove the view of self.

If anyone thinks that the view "there is no self" is a wrong view,
and should be given up, then they will never enter the noble
eightfold path, and never become enlightened.

Regards, Vincent.
vinasp
Posts: 1675
Joined: Tue Aug 18, 2009 7:49 pm
Location: Bristol. United Kingdom.

Re: The Lokayata Discourses

Post by vinasp »

Hi everyone,

If anyone holds any of the following views, then there is no living of
the holy life (ie. no entry into the noble eightfold path.) - MN 63.6

1. The cosmos (loka) is eternal.
2. The cosmos is not eternal.
3. The cosmos is finite.
4. The cosmos is infinite.
5. The soul is the same as the body.
6. The soul is one thing, the body is another.
7. After death a tathagata exists.
8. After death a tathagata does not exist.
9. ... both exists and does not exist.
10. ... neither exists nor does not exist.

Note: I think "cosmos" is better than "world" as a translation of loka.
The cosmos here means all three "realms", kama, rupa and arupa.

Now, why would holding the view that the cosmos is eternal prevent
anyone from entering the noble eightfold path?

The only explanation that I can think of, at present, is that everyone
at the time understood "cosmos" to be the same as self/soul.

In other words, they had a completely different understanding of
"self" than we do today.

Also, a true entry into the noble eightfold path, requires an
understanding that it's purpose is to bring about the cessation
of self/cosmos, which is not real, but only a
mind-fabricated construction.

Regards, Vincent.
chownah
Posts: 9336
Joined: Wed Aug 12, 2009 2:19 pm

Re: The Lokayata Discourses

Post by chownah »

vinasp wrote: Note: I think "cosmos" is better than "world" as a translation of loka.
The cosmos here means all three "realms", kama, rupa and arupa.
I think the best way to understand the meaning of "cosmos" is to read the Loka Suttas.....there are more than one and they each give meanings for "loka" which can be taken as "world" or "universe" or "cosmos" I think. Also to gain further understanding combine the reading of the Loka Suttas with the Sabba Sutta which is The All Sutta. I don't think that your definition is the same as what will be found in these suttas but maybe you will be able to understand these suttas as pertaining to the three "realms"...I don't know but I have never understood them that way but I can be very sloppy in my scholarship sometimes....
chownah
Post Reply