The causes for wisdom

A discussion on all aspects of Theravāda Buddhism
SamKR
Posts: 1037
Joined: Sun Jul 19, 2009 4:33 pm

Re: The causes for wisdom

Post by SamKR »

I can not admire enough the following. Actually I am kind of "attached" to the following sublime words:
"Whatever is seen or heard or sensed
and fastened onto as true by others,
One who is Such — among the self-fettered —
wouldn't further claim to be true or even false.

"Having seen well in advance that arrow
where generations are fastened & hung
— 'I know, I see, that's just how it is!' —
there's nothing of the Tathagata fastened."
http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka ... .than.html
User avatar
Alex123
Posts: 4035
Joined: Wed Mar 10, 2010 11:32 pm

Re: The causes for wisdom

Post by Alex123 »

robertk wrote:2. Think of your mother or father (whether alive or not). Again same process - the cittas and cetasikas of the thinking process are real but the object, mother and father, is concept- not real.

3. If your mother and father were right in front of you now (talking to you) and you think of them, again the object is concept, not real; but the thinking process is real. The colours are real, the sounds are real, but mother and father is concept.
Why is then murder of mother or father is heinous kamma with definite result of going to hell, but murder of man or woman is simply bad kamma?
Is Buddha a concept? If so, why can't anyone kill a Buddha but can kill another man?


Where in Abhidhamma PITAKA is there explicit teaching that concepts don't exist, but only paramattha dhammas do? As far as I know, nowhere... It is found in post canonical commentaries...
User avatar
kirk5a
Posts: 1959
Joined: Thu Sep 23, 2010 1:51 pm

Re: The causes for wisdom

Post by kirk5a »

robertk wrote:2. Think of your mother or father (whether alive or not). Again same process - the cittas and cetasikas of the thinking process are real but the object, mother and father, is concept- not real.
How do you distinguish that from wrong view?
There is .. no mother, no father...This is wrong view.
"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
robertk
Posts: 5603
Joined: Sat Jan 03, 2009 2:08 am

Re: The causes for wisdom

Post by robertk »

Its like I said above. The concepts such as mother and father are the shadow of the actual paramatttha dhammas. But when you think of your mother or father it is not your mother or father. It is a concept.
User avatar
robertk
Posts: 5603
Joined: Sat Jan 03, 2009 2:08 am

Re: The causes for wisdom

Post by robertk »

The namas and rupas that were arising and passing away that were designated the term Buddha were real.
But there was no Buddha in the ultimate sense , that is merely a useful term to describe these unusually sublime series of elements.
User avatar
Alex123
Posts: 4035
Joined: Wed Mar 10, 2010 11:32 pm

Re: The causes for wisdom

Post by Alex123 »

robertk wrote:Its like I said above. The concepts such as mother and father are the shadow of the actual paramatttha dhammas. But when you think of your mother or father it is not your mother or father. It is a concept.
What distinguishes paramattha dhammas that make up a man and paramattha dhammas that make up "one's father"?
There is big kamma difference between killing a man and killing one's father.

What distinguishes paramattha dhammas that make up a Buddjha and paramattha dhammas that make up a man? A man can be killed, according to scriptures Buddha cannot be killed.
User avatar
robertk
Posts: 5603
Joined: Sat Jan 03, 2009 2:08 am

Re: The causes for wisdom

Post by robertk »

Think of the countless number of mind processes, which are real, associated with the care of a child. Thus a parent is different from other people we might meet.
User avatar
Alex123
Posts: 4035
Joined: Wed Mar 10, 2010 11:32 pm

Re: The causes for wisdom

Post by Alex123 »

robertk wrote:Think of the countless number of mind processes, which are real, associated with the care of a child. Thus a patent is different from other people we might meet.

So, there is association between mind processes (paramattha) and child (concept)?
SamKR
Posts: 1037
Joined: Sun Jul 19, 2009 4:33 pm

Re: The causes for wisdom

Post by SamKR »

Alex123 wrote:Why is then murder of mother or father is heinous kamma with definite result of going to hell, but murder of man or woman is simply bad kamma?
Alex123 wrote:
robertk wrote:Think of the countless number of mind processes, which are real, associated with the care of a child. Thus a patent is different from other people we might meet.

So, there is association between mind processes (paramattha) and child (concept)?
Maybe paramattha-dhammas and concepts are related like this:

paramattha-dhammas + ignorance ==> conceptual proliferation ==> Kamma (different kammas with different fruits - as conceptualized, as sankhara-ized) and Dukkha
paramattha-dhammas + no-ignorance ==> vipassana (seeing as such) ==> No Kamma, No Dukkha

So, as long as there is ignorance, sankhara, conceptualization, craving, clinging etc. there are distinctions of kamma and fruits (killing a man or a parent).
If there is no ignorance and no conceptualization one becomes incapable of generating kamma like killing even an insect, let alone a man or his parent.
SamKR
Posts: 1037
Joined: Sun Jul 19, 2009 4:33 pm

Re: The causes for wisdom

Post by SamKR »

That's why even the concepts cannot be said to be unreal or real.
Similarly, "self" cannot be said to be unreal or real. All we can say is whatever phenomenon arises (and passes away) that is Dukkha, that is not self.
dhamma follower
Posts: 354
Joined: Fri Nov 06, 2009 5:48 am

Re: The causes for wisdom

Post by dhamma follower »

Dear Tilt and Kirck5a,
I do not know why it is that you Sujin followers need to be told repeatedly that no one here is suggesting right effort is not some sort of unconditioned thing.
Because some repeatedly quote passage where the Buddha says "one should make an effort" whenever we say right effort is conditioned. If there is agreement that it is indeed a conditioned dhamma, why there need to be those quotes? To make what point?
Please elaborate
I will try, though I'm not very good at that. Meditation teachers usually talk about effortless awareness, where there seems to be no effort to be aware of the object one is paying attention to, or simply aware of whatever arises without the idea of someone who is trying to be aware. The mind is the very sharp, alert...When there is this kind of understanding - that no :one" is aware, we can say (approximately) that there's s some sort of real sati with understanding. Even though the expression says "effortless...", it doesn't mean that there's no effort there, since effort actually arises with most cittas. The effort here gets closer to how right effort is described by the Buddha:
or the sake of the non-arising of evil, unskillful qualities that have not yet arisen...
for the sake of the abandoning of evil, unskillful qualities that have arisen...
for the sake of the arising of skillful qualities that have not yet arisen...(and)
for the maintenance, non-confusion, increase, plenitude, development, & culmination of skillful qualities that have arisen.


because it arises with sati, wholesome citta. And it is felt as no effort at all.

When people talk about effort, they usually think of trying to do something. And when there is right effort, we say there's no effort at all. It suggests that our usual idea of effort is somewhat muddled with the idea of striving, someone striving. It probably is just lobha (greed) with ditthi which is conflated with effort.

I think there's a big gap between what we think things are, and the characteristics of realities that the Buddha talked about.

Another example of usual confusion is between metta and lobha. Refined lobha is usually mistaken for metta. It is very hard to know the real characteristic of metta. Similarly, it is very difficult to know the real characteristic of right effort. Equating someone doing something with arousing right effort is a very misleading approach. Right effort has its own conditions to arise, and understanding deeply the teaching is the key, as in the sutta quoted by Kirck
Energy (viriya) is the state of one who, is vigorous (vira). Its characteristic is marshalling (driving). Its finction is to consolidate conascent states (the accompanying citta and cetasikas). It is manifested as non-collapse. Because of the words "Bestirred, he strives wisely" (Gradual Saying II. I l5), its proximate cause is a sense of urgency; or its proximate cause is grounds for the initiation of energy. When rightly initiated, it should be regarded as the root of all attainments.
Brgrd,

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

Re: The causes for wisdom

Post by dhamma follower »

Alex123 wrote:
robertk wrote:Its like I said above. The concepts such as mother and father are the shadow of the actual paramatttha dhammas. But when you think of your mother or father it is not your mother or father. It is a concept.
What distinguishes paramattha dhammas that make up a man and paramattha dhammas that make up "one's father"?
There is big kamma difference between killing a man and killing one's father.

What distinguishes paramattha dhammas that make up a Buddjha and paramattha dhammas that make up a man? A man can be killed, according to scriptures Buddha cannot be killed.
Greeting Alex,

Without paramatha, there would not be any concept. The concept of father, or Buddha represents the realities which are the cittas, cetasikas and rupas. The cittas which arise in a Buddha are not of the same quality than in other beings. The kamma which kill a Buddha is not the same than killing a ordinary person, just like ignating a fire starter doesn't produce the same result than ignating a mine field. Similarly, in order to kill a father whom we own much gratitude, the degree of akusala must be much bigger than when one kills another man.... It is not the concept that makes a kamma less or more serious than another, it is
1. the degree of kusala and akusala\
2. The quality of citta of the recipient, just like sowing in a barren field doesn't yield the same result than in a fertile one.

Brgrds,
Tam
User avatar
tiltbillings
Posts: 23046
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2008 9:25 am

Re: The causes for wisdom

Post by tiltbillings »

dhamma follower wrote:Dear Tilt and Kirck5a,
I do not know why it is that you Sujin followers need to be told repeatedly that no one here is suggesting right effort is not some sort of unconditioned thing.
Because some repeatedly quote passage where the Buddha says "one should make an effort" whenever we say right effort is conditioned. If there is agreement that it is indeed a conditioned dhamma, why there need to be those quotes? To make what point?
Show me an actual example of that.
I will try, though I'm not very good at that.
Reading all of this abhidhamma talk, I find it less than convincing as away of understanding and talking about the Buddha's teachings in a skillful way. This is especially so, given that the Buddha did not teach Abhidhamma, and he certainly did not teach the later abhidhamma stuff as found in the Abhidhammasangaha.
>> 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
Polar Bear
Posts: 1348
Joined: Mon Apr 16, 2012 7:39 am

Re: The causes for wisdom

Post by Polar Bear »

because it arises with sati, wholesome citta. And it is felt as no effort at all.
There is such a thing as wrong sati, the idea that sati is always wholesome was not taught by the buddha, only samma sati is always wholesome, but that doesn't mean that right effort is felt as no effort at all. Sometimes it takes much effort, with crying and pain. Sometimes, you just have to go against the flow, and that takes effort, and not effortless effort.
"And who is the individual who goes against the flow? There is the case where an individual doesn't indulge in sensual passions and doesn't do evil deeds. Even though it may be with pain, even though it may be with sorrow, even though he may be crying, his face in tears, he lives the holy life that is perfect & pure. This is called the individual who goes against the flow.
http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka ... .than.html

When people talk about effort, they usually think of trying to do something. And when there is right effort, we say there's no effort at all. It suggests that our usual idea of effort is somewhat muddled with the idea of striving, someone striving. It probably is just lobha (greed) with ditthi which is conflated with effort.
Touched
by the touch
of discomforts, hunger,
he should endure cold
& inordinate heat.
He with no home,
in many ways touched by these things,
striving, should make firm his persistence.
http://www.accesstoinsight.org/search_r ... q=striving
"And what is lack of food for the arising of unarisen sloth & drowsiness, or for the growth & increase of sloth & drowsiness once it has arisen? There is the potential for effort, the potential for exertion, the potential for striving. To foster appropriate attention to them: This is lack of food for the arising of unarisen sloth & drowsiness, or for the growth & increase of sloth & drowsiness once it has arisen.
http://www.accesstoinsight.org/search_r ... q=striving
"He dwells with his persistence aroused, [thinking,] 'Gladly would I let the flesh & blood in my body dry up, leaving just the skin, tendons, & bones, but if I have not attained what can be reached through human steadfastness, human persistence, human striving, there will be no relaxing my persistence.'"

"Endowed with these eight qualities, a monk is worthy of gifts, worthy of hospitality, worthy of offerings, worthy of respect, an incomparable field of merit for the world."
http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka ... .than.html
Right effort requires much desire, much persistence, it isn't always easy and one does have to strive. The Buddha has clearly said so.

I think there's a big gap between what we think things are, and the characteristics of realities that the Buddha talked about.
The problem is that all this talk about realities from you comes mostly from abhidhamma, which the Buddha clearly did not teach.
Another example of usual confusion is between metta and lobha. Refined lobha is usually mistaken for metta. It is very hard to know the real characteristic of metta.


This is rather debatable. But there isn't much point in getting into it unless you provide an example of what you mean like you were asked earlier.
Similarly, it is very difficult to know the real characteristic of right effort. Equating someone doing something with arousing right effort is a very misleading approach. Right effort has its own conditions to arise, and understanding deeply the teaching is the key, as in the sutta quoted by Kirck
Effort has desire as a condition.
There being an agreement through pondering those dhammas, desire arises. With the arising of desire, he becomes willing. Willing, he contemplates (lit: "weighs," "compares"). Contemplating, he makes an exertion. Exerting himself, he both realizes the ultimate meaning of the truth with his body and sees by penetrating it with discernment.
http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka ... .than.html
Contremplating dhamma is just one step, you have to exert yourself eventually.


:anjali:
"I don't envision a single thing that, when developed & cultivated, leads to such great benefit as the mind. The mind, when developed & cultivated, leads to great benefit."

"I don't envision a single thing that, when undeveloped & uncultivated, brings about such suffering & stress as the mind. The mind, when undeveloped & uncultivated, brings about suffering & stress."
Post Reply