"The Deathless" (amata)

A discussion on all aspects of Theravāda Buddhism
User avatar
kirk5a
Posts: 1959
Joined: Thu Sep 23, 2010 1:51 pm

Re: "The Deathless" (amata)

Post by kirk5a »

nowheat wrote: when our aversion to it has gotten so powerful from practice that it just no longer arises to result in dukkha.
The sense of self no long arises though the power of aversion?
"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
User avatar
tiltbillings
Posts: 23046
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2008 9:25 am

Re: "The Deathless" (amata)

Post by tiltbillings »

kirk5a wrote:
nowheat wrote: when our aversion to it has gotten so powerful from practice that it just no longer arises to result in dukkha.
The sense of self no long arises though the power of aversion?
While "aversion" can ba useful tool when carefully used, I'd like to see the textual evidence for nowheat's claim.
>> Do you see a man wise [enlightened/ariya] in his own eyes? There is more hope for a fool than for him.<< -- Proverbs 26:12

This being is bound to samsara, kamma is his means for going beyond. -- SN I, 38.

“Of course it is happening inside your head, Harry, but why on earth should that mean that it is not real?” HPatDH p.723
Sarva
Posts: 209
Joined: Sun Mar 18, 2012 5:49 pm

Re: "The Deathless" (amata)

Post by Sarva »

"The Deathless", used alone seems to imply a state or a being i.e. a deathless self, which if taken as such is opposed to anatta.

However when used in respect to the process of birth (coming) and death (going) then it is closer to a pointer beyond impermanence and suffering (anicca and dukkha).

Nibanna is not subject to coming or going and hence could be described as free from birth and death (or birthless and deathless) but to describe it as "The Deathless" risks conceptualising it into something (a self). But it is just a stumbling block of language limitation which can be overcome. I don't consider it to be too troublesome.

E.g. http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka ... .irel.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Then, on realizing its significance, the Lord uttered on that occasion this inspired utterance:
For the supported there is instability, for the unsupported there is no instability; when there is no instability there is serenity; when there is serenity there is no inclination: when there is no inclination there is no coming-and-going; when there is no coming-and-going there is no decease-and-uprising; when there is no decease-and-uprising there is neither "here" nor "beyond" nor "in between the two." Just this is the end of suffering.
“Both formerly & now, it is only stress that I describe, and the cessation of stress.” — SN 22:86
nowheat
Posts: 543
Joined: Thu Oct 15, 2009 3:42 am
Location: Texas
Contact:

Re: "The Deathless" (amata)

Post by nowheat »

tiltbillings wrote:
kirk5a wrote:
nowheat wrote: when our aversion to it has gotten so powerful from practice that it just no longer arises to result in dukkha.
The sense of self no long arises though the power of aversion?
While "aversion" can ba useful tool when carefully used, I'd like to see the textual evidence for nowheat's claim.
I wasn't using "aversion" in its Theravadin context, I was using it in its common English context. But here's what I mean:

Where I used aversion loosely, Thanissaro Bhikkhu uses "disenchantment":
AN 11.2 wrote: "For a person who knows & sees things as they actually are, there is no need for an act of will, 'May I feel disenchantment.' It is in the nature of things that a person who knows & sees things as they actually are feels disenchantment.
and here too, from Bhikkhu Bodhi:
SN 12.23 wrote: "Dispassion, monks, also has a supporting condition, I say, it does not lack a supporting condition. And what is the supporting condition for dispassion? 'Disenchantment' should be the reply.

"Disenchantment, monks, also has a supporting condition, I say, it does not lack a supporting condition. And what is the supporting condition for disenchantment? 'The knowledge and vision of things as they really are' should be the reply.
The word they are translating as "disenchantment" is nibbindati:
Nibbindati [nis+vindati, vid2] to get wearied of (c. loc.); to have enough of, be satiated, turn away from, to be disgusted with.
:namaste:
User avatar
mikenz66
Posts: 19943
Joined: Sat Jan 10, 2009 7:37 am
Location: Aotearoa, New Zealand

Re: "The Deathless" (amata)

Post by mikenz66 »

Certainly nibbida is an important step in the progress towards nibbana:
See: http://dhammawheel.com/viewtopic.php?f=25&t=11701" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
... for the Release has its prerequisite, I tell you. It is not without a prerequisite. And what is its prerequisite? Dispassion... Disenchantment... Knowledge & vision of things as they actually are present ...
and the Theravada commentaries, where it is framed in terms of disenchantment (sometimes more strongly translated as "disgust") with the aggregates. See, for example:
http://aimwell.org/Books/Mahasi/Progres ... ml#Disgust" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
8. Knowledge of Disgust (nibbidā-ñāna)

:anjali:
Mike
squarepeg
Posts: 47
Joined: Fri Dec 30, 2011 12:58 am

Re: "The Deathless" (amata)

Post by squarepeg »

aversion=emotion, dispassion=reason
"Yadisam vapate bijam tadisam harate phalam" — as we sow, so shall we reap
Maranam Bhavissati - "death will take place"
User avatar
Viscid
Posts: 931
Joined: Fri Jul 09, 2010 8:55 pm
Location: Toronto, Canada
Contact:

Re: "The Deathless" (amata)

Post by Viscid »

Seems like there is a conventional/unconventional dichotomy in the use of the word 'aversion.' The conventional leads to further conditioning/attachment, while the unconventional (aversion to mental fabrications or further conditioning) leads to deconditioning/dispassion/release.
"What holds attention determines action." - William James
User avatar
mikenz66
Posts: 19943
Joined: Sat Jan 10, 2009 7:37 am
Location: Aotearoa, New Zealand

Re: "The Deathless" (amata)

Post by mikenz66 »

squarepeg wrote:aversion=emotion, dispassion=reason
I don't think one can develop dispassion by just reasoning. The suttas, commentaries, and modern teachers seem to be in agreement that it is something that has come from experiential knowledge.

:anjali:
Mike
squarepeg
Posts: 47
Joined: Fri Dec 30, 2011 12:58 am

Re: "The Deathless" (amata)

Post by squarepeg »

Viscid wrote:Seems like there is a conventional/unconventional dichotomy in the use of the word 'aversion.' The conventional leads to further conditioning/attachment, while the unconventional (aversion to mental fabrications or further conditioning) leads to deconditioning/dispassion/release.
Its not that its conventional and unconventional. Averion implys that there is a object of the senses, ie something you can turn away from or act aversly to, ie "verses" (what is known as an emotional reaction). Dispassion (or unconventional aversion to put it in your words) implys that there is no action towards any object of the senses, ie mental reasoning
"Yadisam vapate bijam tadisam harate phalam" — as we sow, so shall we reap
Maranam Bhavissati - "death will take place"
squarepeg
Posts: 47
Joined: Fri Dec 30, 2011 12:58 am

Re: "The Deathless" (amata)

Post by squarepeg »

mikenz66 wrote:
squarepeg wrote:aversion=emotion, dispassion=reason
I don't think one can develop dispassion by just reasoning. The suttas, commentaries, and modern teachers seem to be in agreement that it is something that has come from experiential knowledge.

:anjali:
Mike
Its experiential in the way that there is dispassion "about", the product of narritive reasoning, litterally (reason is) because humans have the ability to reorient our goals with out it affecting our emotional state.

while in the case of aversion it is a "towards"
"Yadisam vapate bijam tadisam harate phalam" — as we sow, so shall we reap
Maranam Bhavissati - "death will take place"
User avatar
Viscid
Posts: 931
Joined: Fri Jul 09, 2010 8:55 pm
Location: Toronto, Canada
Contact:

Re: "The Deathless" (amata)

Post by Viscid »

squarepeg wrote:
Viscid wrote:Seems like there is a conventional/unconventional dichotomy in the use of the word 'aversion.' The conventional leads to further conditioning/attachment, while the unconventional (aversion to mental fabrications or further conditioning) leads to deconditioning/dispassion/release.
Its not that its conventional and unconventional. Averion implys that there is a object of the senses, ie something you can turn away from or act aversly to, ie "verses" (what is known as an emotional reaction). Dispassion (or unconventional aversion to put it in your words) implys that there is no action towards any object of the senses, ie mental reasoning
I didn't really know how to word it, so substitute 'conventional' and 'unconventional' with whatever you want. The important idea is to distinguish two types of aversion, one skillful and one not.
"What holds attention determines action." - William James
squarepeg
Posts: 47
Joined: Fri Dec 30, 2011 12:58 am

Re: "The Deathless" (amata)

Post by squarepeg »

Viscid wrote:
squarepeg wrote:
Viscid wrote:Seems like there is a conventional/unconventional dichotomy in the use of the word 'aversion.' The conventional leads to further conditioning/attachment, while the unconventional (aversion to mental fabrications or further conditioning) leads to deconditioning/dispassion/release.
Its not that its conventional and unconventional. Averion implys that there is a object of the senses, ie something you can turn away from or act aversly to, ie "verses" (what is known as an emotional reaction). Dispassion (or unconventional aversion to put it in your words) implys that there is no action towards any object of the senses, ie mental reasoning
I didn't really know how to word it, so substitute 'conventional' and 'unconventional' with whatever you want. The important idea is to distinguish two types of aversion, one skillful and one not.
No no no, there is no skillful aversion!
imagine your the buddha right now and you have to compose a doctrine with out a written language, would you still put too obviously diffrent definitions under the word aversion? the dhamma wouldnt last a decade!
"Yadisam vapate bijam tadisam harate phalam" — as we sow, so shall we reap
Maranam Bhavissati - "death will take place"
squarepeg
Posts: 47
Joined: Fri Dec 30, 2011 12:58 am

Re: "The Deathless" (amata)

Post by squarepeg »

squarepeg wrote:
mikenz66 wrote:
squarepeg wrote:aversion=emotion, dispassion=reason
I don't think one can develop dispassion by just reasoning. The suttas, commentaries, and modern teachers seem to be in agreement that it is something that has come from experiential knowledge.

:anjali:
Mike
Its experiential in the way that there is dispassion "about", the product of narritive reasoning, litterally (reason is) because humans have the ability to reorient our goals with out it affecting our emotional state.

while in the case of aversion it is a "towards"

What i mean is, we have the ability to think about a tiger with out feeling fear. but just becasue we have this ability dosent mean that we are always using it, many times thoughts about things trigger the same emotional response (physicological change) then if it were fresh off the press, or the optic nerve in this case. If humans could not reflect like this with out physicological change then we would not be able to reason and there would be no enlightenment either.
"Yadisam vapate bijam tadisam harate phalam" — as we sow, so shall we reap
Maranam Bhavissati - "death will take place"
User avatar
tiltbillings
Posts: 23046
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2008 9:25 am

Re: "The Deathless" (amata)

Post by tiltbillings »

nowheat wrote:I wasn't using "aversion" in its Theravadin context, I was using it in its common English context. But here's what I mean:
Okay. Thanks. I appreciate the textual quotes, especially AN 11.2. I do not think I would use the word aversion, nor would I make quite the same statement as you did, but no biggie. Like most everything, opinions are going to vary.
>> Do you see a man wise [enlightened/ariya] in his own eyes? There is more hope for a fool than for him.<< -- Proverbs 26:12

This being is bound to samsara, kamma is his means for going beyond. -- SN I, 38.

“Of course it is happening inside your head, Harry, but why on earth should that mean that it is not real?” HPatDH p.723
User avatar
tiltbillings
Posts: 23046
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2008 9:25 am

Re: "The Deathless" (amata)

Post by tiltbillings »

Sarva wrote: Nibanna is not subject to coming or going and hence could be described as free from birth and death (or birthless and deathless) but to describe it as "The Deathless" risks conceptualising it into something (a self). But it is just a stumbling block of language limitation which can be overcome. I don't consider it to be too troublesome.

E.g. http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka ... .irel.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Then, on realizing its significance, the Lord uttered on that occasion this inspired utterance:
For the supported there is instability, for the unsupported there is no instability; when there is no instability there is serenity; when there is serenity there is no inclination: when there is no inclination there is no coming-and-going; when there is no coming-and-going there is no decease-and-uprising; when there is no decease-and-uprising there is neither "here" nor "beyond" nor "in between the two." Just this is the end of suffering.
These Udana texts are really interesting, and language becomes one of the difficult hurdles in trying to make sense of what is being talked about here.

Where I would differ from what you said is this: Rather than saying "Nibanna is not subject to coming or going," I would say: "Not subject to coming and going is nibbana." What this passage is describing, of course (at least in my opinion), is not nibbana as being something. It is, rather, describing the interior landscape of the person who has brought an end to dukkha which is nibbana (unbinding), bodhi (awakening), asankhata (freedopm from the conditioning of greed, hatred, and delusion).
>> Do you see a man wise [enlightened/ariya] in his own eyes? There is more hope for a fool than for him.<< -- Proverbs 26:12

This being is bound to samsara, kamma is his means for going beyond. -- SN I, 38.

“Of course it is happening inside your head, Harry, but why on earth should that mean that it is not real?” HPatDH p.723
Post Reply