Re: The Dhamma eye: "whatever aising-dhamma cessation-dhamma"
Posted: Mon Feb 13, 2012 5:37 am
Now that is really funny. The words are written there yet there is desire for other words.
Why is this?
Kind regards
Why is this?
Kind regards
A Buddhist discussion forum on the Dhamma of Theravāda Buddhism
https://www.dhammawheel.com/
Because there appears to be some disagreement about what the words mean. Clearly Retro understands them in a different way to how I do, based on his comments about how others have explained and practised the Dhamma. He is, of course, free to post what he likes, but it is much easier to snipe at other approaches than to clearly explain one's own.TMingyur wrote:Now that is really funny. The words are written there yet there is desire for other words.
Why is this?
Actually this is explicitly stated in Tittha Sutta (AN 3.61):Cittasanto wrote:just to chip in my nonsense
to my understanding Dependent Arising correlates to the Second Noble Truth and Dependent Cessation with the Third Noble Truth, See DN22 for an example, and to check.
Great! Same here.retrofuturist wrote: There is no sniping - merely a preference for Buddhavacana over speculation and other words.
Thanks, that's a very useful reference!piotr wrote:Actually this is explicitly stated in Tittha Sutta (AN 3.61):Cittasanto wrote:just to chip in my nonsense
to my understanding Dependent Arising correlates to the Second Noble Truth and Dependent Cessation with the Third Noble Truth, See DN22 for an example, and to check.
...
How did you come to the conclusion that "this body composed of the four great elements is seen standing for a year, two years, three, four, five, ten, twenty, thirty, forty, fifty, a hundred years or more" is a viewpoint of puthujjana?retrofuturist wrote:Indeed. Which is why I found it odd that the "uninstructed run-of-the-mill person" viewpoint was being valorized, in preference to the Dhamma-Eye.
I knew it was somewhere and DN22 didn't specifically support of denounce it, but could be interpreted to incline in that way, however memory is fuzzy and not got the resources now to check references properly yet.piotr wrote:Hi guys,
Actually this is explicitly stated in Tittha Sutta (AN 3.61):Cittasanto wrote:just to chip in my nonsense
to my understanding Dependent Arising correlates to the Second Noble Truth and Dependent Cessation with the Third Noble Truth, See DN22 for an example, and to check.
From the sutta itself. "It would be better for the uninstructed run-of-the-mill person to hold to the body composed of the four great elements..."piotr wrote:How did you come to the conclusion that "this body composed of the four great elements is seen standing for a year, two years, three, four, five, ten, twenty, thirty, forty, fifty, a hundred years or more" is a viewpoint of puthujjana?
The sutta says that the more preferable viewpoint of puthujjana is to hold body as a self. It doesn't say that "body composed of the four great elements is seen standing for a year, two years, three, four, five, ten, twenty, thirty, forty, fifty, a hundred years or more" is a viewpoint of putthujana and therefore should be abandoned.retrofuturist wrote:From the sutta itself. "It would be better for the uninstructed run-of-the-mill person to hold to the body composed of the four great elements"
Well if the initial sutta reference alone was insufficient for you, cross reference it with MN 1 and you'll see even more clearly that it is putthujana view to be abandoned...Piotr wrote:It doesn't say that "body composed of the four great elements is seen standing for a year, two years, three, four, five, ten, twenty, thirty, forty, fifty, a hundred years or more" is a viewpoint of putthujana and therefore should be abandoned.
So not only does SN 12.61: Assutavā (Uninstructed) Sutta call it putthujana view, but MN 1: Mulapariyaya Sutta calls it putthujana view and explicitly says it should be abandoned, in order for proper comprehension to occur.The Putthujana
The Blessed One said: "There is the case, monks, where an uninstructed run-of-the-mill person — who has no regard for noble ones, is not well-versed or disciplined in their Dhamma; who has no regard for men of integrity, is not well-versed or disciplined in their Dhamma — perceives earth as earth. Perceiving earth as earth, he conceives [things] about earth, he conceives [things] in earth, he conceives [things] coming out of earth, he conceives earth as 'mine,' he delights in earth. Why is that? Because he has not comprehended it, I tell you.
(repeated for the other three elements)
The Trainee
"A monk who is a trainee — yearning for the unexcelled relief from bondage, his aspirations as yet unfulfilled — directly knows earth as earth. Directly knowing earth as earth, let him not conceive things about earth, let him not conceive things in earth, let him not conceive things coming out of earth, let him not conceive earth as 'mine,' let him not delight in earth. Why is that? So that he may comprehend it, I tell you.
(repeated for the other three elements)
The Arahant
"A monk who is a Worthy One, devoid of mental fermentations — who has attained completion, finished the task, laid down the burden, attained the true goal, destroyed the fetters of becoming, and is released through right knowledge — directly knows earth as earth. Directly knowing earth as earth, he does not conceive things about earth, does not conceive things in earth, does not conceive things coming out of earth, does not conceive earth as 'mine,' does not delight in earth. Why is that? Because he has comprehended it, I tell you.
(repeated for the other three elements)
That's exactly what I've said. But you've suggested that not only holding a body as self but also seeing it as standing for a year or more is a wrong view.retrofuturist wrote:Identifying with the body is Putthujana-eye, not Dhamma-eye.