Hello SarathW,SarathW wrote:Hi Starter
What Buddha taught was:
1 Anicca; 2 Dukkha; 3 Anatta
Anicca leads to Dukkha, Dukkha leads to Anatta, Anatta leads to Non-Conceiving, Non-Conceiving leads to Nibbana.
Thanks and Metta!
Starter
Hello SarathW,SarathW wrote:Hi Starter
What Buddha taught was:
1 Anicca; 2 Dukkha; 3 Anatta
Please see the Buddha's 2nd discourse to his first 5 disciples, and a MN discourse in which the Buddha won the debate with a very proud asetic and convinced him it's not suitable to take something dukkha as atta. Sorry I forgot the number and name of the discourses.SarathW wrote:I am not sure whether Dukkha lead to Anatta.
First, count the syllables in every line of the verse - it's a standard 8 syllable pattern, which is the classical vatta metre (Warder, p.358). Now, if this verse had been left in the hands of a totally unpoetic monk who recognised the clause structure in the first 4 lines of the answer, yattha would also have been added to the first line as such -1 Kattha āpo ca pathavī,
tejo vāyo na gādhati;
2 Kattha dīghañca rassañca,
aṇuṃ thūlaṃ subhāsubhaṃ;
3 Kattha nāmañca rūpañca,
asesaṃ uparujjhatī’ti.
1‘Viññāṇaṃ anidassanaṃ,
anantaṃ sabbatopabhaṃ;
Ettha āpo ca pathavī,
tejo vāyo na gādhati.
2 Ettha dīghañca rassañca,
aṇuṃ thūlaṃ subhāsubhaṃ;
3 Ettha nāmañca rūpañca,
asesaṃ uparujjhati;
Viññāṇassa nirodhena,
etthetaṃ uparujjhatī’”ti.
is a typical Pali clause structure, where the red is the subordinate clause, and the blue the main clause. The subordinate clause employs the relative adverb "where" (yattha) and furnishes the opening that leads to the main clause about the 4 elements.Yattha viññāṇaṃ anidassanaṃ,
anantaṃ sabbatopabhaṃ;
Ettha āpo ca pathavī,
tejo vāyo na gādhati.
What do you make of these suttas where the ceasing of name-and-form are associated with cutting the ties of being (existence)?Sylvester wrote:
The subordinate clause and the main clause are talking about the same thing, namely consciousness of the Formless Attainments. Nothing more.
“Na aññatra bhagavatā,
nāññatra tava sāsanā;
Yassa te dhammamaññāya,
acchiduṃ bhavabandhanaṃ.
Yattha nāmañca rūpañca,
asesaṃ uparujjhati;
Taṃ te dhammaṃ idhaññāya,
acchiduṃ bhavabandhanan”ti.
Not apart from the Blessed One.
Not apart from the Teaching.
Through knowledge of your Dhamma,
They severed the ties of being.
Where name and form
Cease without remainder;
Through knowledge of that Dhamma here,
They severed the ties of being. SN 2.24
Yesaṃ rāgo ca doso ca,
avijjā ca virājitā;
Khīṇāsavā arahanto,
tesaṃ vijaṭitā jaṭā.
Yattha nāmañca rūpañca,
asesaṃ uparujjhati;
Paṭighaṃ rūpasaññā ca,
etthesā chijjate jaṭā”ti.
“Those for whom lust and hatred
Along with ignorance have been expunged,
The arahants with taints destroyed:
For them the tangle is disentangled.
“Where name-and-form ceases,
Stops without remainder,
And also impingement and perception of form:
It is here this tangle is cut.” SN 1.23
2 Ettha dīghañca rassañca,
aṇuṃ thūlaṃ subhāsubhaṃ;
3 Ettha nāmañca rūpañca,
asesaṃ uparujjhati;
Notice the list of synonyms at the end of the passage?\\\+++pratyayam āddhyātmam utpadyate vedayitaṃ sukhaṃ +++\\\
\\\anyatamo bhikṣus trīṇi sūtrāṇi || ? || āyusmān ānandastrīṇi +\\\
\\\++ādhyātmikam āyatanaṃ tac ca bhagavatā uddiṣṭam avibhaktaṃ \\\
\\\ ++++mana ādhyātmikam āyatanaṃ tac ca bhagavatā +\\\
\\\ +++ arūpam anidarśanam apratighaṃ ++++\\\
https://suttacentral.net/skt/sf18
A translation possible?Sylvester wrote:Something from a Sanskrit fragment in a parallel to MN 148 -
Notice the list of synonyms at the end of the passage?\\\+++pratyayam āddhyātmam utpadyate vedayitaṃ sukhaṃ +++\\\
\\\anyatamo bhikṣus trīṇi sūtrāṇi || ? || āyusmān ānandastrīṇi +\\\
\\\++ādhyātmikam āyatanaṃ tac ca bhagavatā uddiṣṭam avibhaktaṃ \\\
\\\ ++++mana ādhyātmikam āyatanaṃ tac ca bhagavatā +\\\
\\\ +++ arūpam anidarśanam apratighaṃ ++++\\\
https://suttacentral.net/skt/sf18
Don’t the arūpa jhānas fall within the realm of nāmarūpa, cf. for example SN 14.11 where the the elements of the base of infinite space and so on are ultimately discernible dependent upon the element of form? Would it be correct to think of them as apaṭigha, i.e. without impingement? Oddly -- if I'm not mistaken -- I don't believe the word "apaṭigha" even appears in the Sutta Pitaka.Sylvester wrote:Notice the list of synonyms at the end of the passage?\\\ +++ arūpam anidarśanam apratighaṃ ++++\\\