Aggregate?

A discussion on all aspects of Theravāda Buddhism
Post Reply
User avatar
retrofuturist
Site Admin
Posts: 20167
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 9:52 pm
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Contact:

Aggregate?

Post by retrofuturist » Thu Aug 09, 2012 5:37 am

Greetings,

"If one does not aggregate (verb), there are is no aggregate (noun), let alone five of them"

Alternatively...

"If one does not bundle (verb), there are is no bundle (noun), let alone five of them"

Agree? Disagree?

Discuss.

:popcorn:

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/aggregate" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/bundle" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Metta,
Retro. :)
"Do not force others, including children, by any means whatsoever, to adopt your views, whether by authority, threat, money, propaganda, or even education." - Ven. Thich Nhat Hanh

"The uprooting of identity is seen by the noble ones as pleasurable; but this contradicts what the whole world sees." (Snp 3.12)

"One discerns wrong view as wrong view, and right view as right view. This is one's right view." (MN 117)

User avatar
tiltbillings
Posts: 23044
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2008 9:25 am

Re: Aggregate?

Post by tiltbillings » Thu Aug 09, 2012 6:33 am

retrofuturist wrote:Greetings,

"If one does not aggregate (verb), there are is no aggregate (noun), let alone five of them"

Alternatively...

"If one does not bundle (verb), there are is no bundle (noun), let alone five of them"

Agree? Disagree?

Discuss.

:popcorn:

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/aggregate" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/bundle" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Metta,
Retro. :)
Is there a "one" that bundles/aggregates? And, of course to paraphrase, when "one" is liable to bundling because of self(, which is itself the result of bunbling), having known the perils in what is liable to bunbling, seeks freedom from bundling, the uttermost security from bundling -- no longer bound -- won freedom from bundling, the uttermost security from the bundling -- no longer bound."
>> 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

Sylvester
Posts: 2205
Joined: Tue Mar 10, 2009 9:57 am

Re: Aggregate?

Post by Sylvester » Thu Aug 09, 2012 7:22 am

Hi Retro

What's the verb you were thinking of in the Pali?

I think the usual suspects for the arising of the acquisitions/upadhi would be the various forms of sankhāra such as those denoted by the verbs ceteti, pakappeti or anuseti. This per the 2nd nidāna.

User avatar
Polar Bear
Posts: 1203
Joined: Mon Apr 16, 2012 7:39 am
Location: Bear Republic

Re: Aggregate?

Post by Polar Bear » Thu Aug 09, 2012 7:55 am

if you explain your point a little more clearly retro, that would be great

:namaste:
"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."

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

Re: Aggregate?

Post by kirk5a » Thu Aug 09, 2012 7:57 am

retrofuturist wrote:Greetings,

"If one does not aggregate (verb), there are is no aggregate (noun), let alone five of them"

Alternatively...

"If one does not bundle (verb), there are is no bundle (noun), let alone five of them"
He discerns that 'This mode of perception is empty of the effluent of sensuality... becoming... ignorance. And there is just this non-emptiness: that connected with the six sensory spheres, dependent on this very body with life as its condition.' Thus he regards it as empty of whatever is not there. Whatever remains, he discerns as present: 'There is this.'
http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka ... .than.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

Dinsdale
Posts: 6135
Joined: Fri Mar 05, 2010 10:32 am
Location: Andromeda looks nice

Re: Aggregate?

Post by Dinsdale » Thu Aug 09, 2012 8:41 am

retrofuturist wrote:Greetings,

"If one does not aggregate (verb), there are is no aggregate (noun), let alone five of them"

Agree? Disagree?
Disagree. We're stuck with them. ;)
Buddha save me from new-agers!

User avatar
tiltbillings
Posts: 23044
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2008 9:25 am

Re: Aggregate?

Post by tiltbillings » Thu Aug 09, 2012 8:51 am

porpoise wrote:
retrofuturist wrote:Greetings,

"If one does not aggregate (verb), there are is no aggregate (noun), let alone five of them"

Agree? Disagree?
Disagree. We're stuck with them. ;)
Indeed we are, but we are not stuck with the attachment to/identification with them.
>> 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
retrofuturist
Site Admin
Posts: 20167
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 9:52 pm
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Contact:

Re: Aggregate?

Post by retrofuturist » Thu Aug 09, 2012 8:58 am

Greetings all,

Tilt ~ "One" is there only because the English language has a requirement for a subject in such a sentence. One might says there is bundling, but no bundler to be found. 8-) Re: "seeks freedom from bundling, the uttermost security from bundling -- no longer bound -- won freedom from bundling, the uttermost security from the bundling -- no longer bound."... well said.

Sylvester ~ I had no corresponding Pali term in mind for the verbs, though you're welcome to propose something should you wish.

Kirk ~ Nice quote. 8-)

polarbuddha101 ~ I'm challenging the oft made statement that the aggregates are "what we are"... these things are self only if they are erroneously picked up, taken up and bundled/aggregated as such. Unaggregated, they are not aggregates. Unbundled, they are not bundles.

Porpoise ~ Thanks for sharing your thoughts.

Metta,
Retro. :)
"Do not force others, including children, by any means whatsoever, to adopt your views, whether by authority, threat, money, propaganda, or even education." - Ven. Thich Nhat Hanh

"The uprooting of identity is seen by the noble ones as pleasurable; but this contradicts what the whole world sees." (Snp 3.12)

"One discerns wrong view as wrong view, and right view as right view. This is one's right view." (MN 117)

Sylvester
Posts: 2205
Joined: Tue Mar 10, 2009 9:57 am

Re: Aggregate?

Post by Sylvester » Thu Aug 09, 2012 11:16 am

retrofuturist wrote:Greetings all,


polarbuddha101 ~ I'm challenging the oft made statement that the aggregates are "what we are"...
With this, I would agree, being a fan of Sue Hamilton on this score.

these things are self only if they are erroneously picked up, taken up and bundled/aggregated as such. Unaggregated, they are not aggregates. Unbundled, they are not bundles.
I think this will probably not find a place in the traditional understanding of the Aggregates (associated with) Clinging (pañcupādānakkhandhā) versus the mere Aggregates - see SN 22.48.

What Tilt alludes to in terms of the attachment or identification is represented by the verb upādiyati (take up). It's related to the noun upādāna (clinging). This verb comes up famously in SN 12.15 where its function is tied to the formative powers of the belief "my self" (attā me). Perhaps this is the closest verb to what you had in mind, BUT, whether one clings or not, whether one is awash in the āsavas or not, one is able to say whether the Aggregates are or are not.
Last edited by Sylvester on Fri Aug 10, 2012 5:04 am, edited 1 time in total.

Dinsdale
Posts: 6135
Joined: Fri Mar 05, 2010 10:32 am
Location: Andromeda looks nice

Re: Aggregate?

Post by Dinsdale » Thu Aug 09, 2012 12:27 pm

retrofuturist wrote:I'm challenging the oft made statement that the aggregates are "what we are"... these things are self only if they are erroneously picked up, taken up and bundled/aggregated as such. Unaggregated, they are not aggregates. Unbundled, they are not bundles.
An aggregate is just a collection, in this case a collection of processes based on which we assume a self.
Buddha save me from new-agers!

User avatar
DarwidHalim
Posts: 537
Joined: Thu Sep 08, 2011 11:49 am
Location: Neither Samsara nor Nirvana

Re: Aggregate?

Post by DarwidHalim » Thu Aug 09, 2012 3:24 pm

Retro,

If one doesn't bundle (verb), there is no bundle (noun).

If one doesnt aggregate (verb), there is no aggregate (noun).

Yes, I agree.

Now, I want to ask this:

So, how can there are aggregate of feeling, perception, etc., when there is no owner?

Since there is no owner that ever make them.
I am not here nor there.
I am not right nor wrong.
I do not exist neither non-exist.
I am not I nor non-I.
I am not in samsara nor nirvana.
To All Buddhas, I bow down for the teaching of emptiness. Thank You!

User avatar
tiltbillings
Posts: 23044
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2008 9:25 am

Re: Aggregate?

Post by tiltbillings » Thu Aug 09, 2012 3:45 pm

retrofuturist wrote: I'm challenging the oft made statement that the aggregates are "what we are"... these things are self only if they are erroneously picked up, taken up and bundled/aggregated as such. Unaggregated, they are not aggregates. Unbundled, they are not bundles.
I am assuming you are talking about the khandhas.

What does Unaggregated, they are not aggregates. Unbundled, they are not bundles mean? I wonder if the "what we are" needs to be explained a bit more.
>> 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
kirk5a
Posts: 1959
Joined: Thu Sep 23, 2010 1:51 pm

Re: Aggregate?

Post by kirk5a » Thu Aug 09, 2012 4:00 pm

DarwidHalim wrote: So, how can there are aggregate of feeling, perception, etc., when there is no owner?

Since there is no owner that ever make them.
paticca-samuppada
"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
DarwidHalim
Posts: 537
Joined: Thu Sep 08, 2011 11:49 am
Location: Neither Samsara nor Nirvana

Re: Aggregate?

Post by DarwidHalim » Thu Aug 09, 2012 4:04 pm

Kirk,

Please try to avoid jargon, since jargon doesn't help.

If we want to use Pali, we need people who understand Pali. If we only understand one or two words, it is also no use.
I am not here nor there.
I am not right nor wrong.
I do not exist neither non-exist.
I am not I nor non-I.
I am not in samsara nor nirvana.
To All Buddhas, I bow down for the teaching of emptiness. Thank You!

User avatar
SDC
Posts: 4408
Joined: Mon Dec 14, 2009 11:08 pm

Re: Aggregate?

Post by SDC » Thu Aug 09, 2012 4:13 pm

retrofuturist wrote:Greetings,

"If one does not aggregate (verb), there are is no aggregate (noun), let alone five of them"

Alternatively...

"If one does not bundle (verb), there are is no bundle (noun), let alone five of them"

Agree? Disagree?
tiltbillings wrote:Is there a "one" that bundles/aggregates? And, of course to paraphrase, when "one" is liable to bundling because of self(, which is itself the result of bunbling)..."
Another alternate:

"If there is no accumulating(verb), there is no accumulation(noun), let alone 5 of them."

Accumulation is Venerable Punnaji’s rendering. I dig it.

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: justindesilva and 86 guests