What is the difference between Samma Sati and Yoniso Manasikara?

A discussion on all aspects of Theravāda Buddhism
User avatar
DooDoot
Posts: 2929
Joined: Tue Aug 08, 2017 11:06 pm

Re: What is the difference between Samma Sati and Yoniso Manasikara?

Post by DooDoot » Fri Feb 09, 2018 7:45 pm

Zom wrote:
Fri Feb 09, 2018 12:55 pm
Yes. A stream-winnder does not have self-view, but he reborns for 7 lives maximum.
I am unable to find the word "lives" in the Pali in SN 13.1. Can you help me here?
Zom wrote:
Fri Feb 09, 2018 12:55 pm
There is no such thing as self, but there is such thing as impermanent and ever-changing heap of constructions - in a sense, it is reincarnated
But the sutta says in relation to kamma:
I am the owner of my actions, heir to my actions, born of my actions, related through my actions, and have my actions as my arbitrator. Whatever I do, for good or for evil, to that will I fall heir.'

https://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitak ... .than.html
While arahants appear to have ended kamma by completing the noble path of not-self (AN 6.63), surely the belief in the efficacy of kamma for a good rebirth depends on having self-view, as seems to be explained in MN 117:
And what is the right view with effluents, siding with merit, resulting in acquisitions (upadhi)? 'There is what is given, what is offered, what is sacrificed. There are fruits & results of good & bad actions. There is this world & the other world. There is mother & father. There are spontaneously reborn beings (satta); there are contemplatives & brahmans who, faring rightly & practicing rightly, proclaim this world & the other after having directly known & realized it for themselves.' This is the right view with effluents, siding with merit, resulting in acquisitions.

https://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitak ... .than.html
As I originally suggested, if I did not believe "I" will be reincarnated, I cannot imagine any reasons or incentive for doing good kamma. What would I fear if it was not "me" that was reincarnated?
Surveying the world with the eye of a Buddha, I saw beings with little dust in their eyes and with much dust in their eyes, with keen faculties and with dull faculties, with good qualities and with bad qualities, easy to teach and hard to teach, and some who dwelt seeing fear and blame in the other world.

https://suttacentral.net/en/mn26
With regard to this, an observant person considers thus: 'If there is the other world, then this venerable person — on the breakup of the body, after death — will reappear in a good destination, a heavenly world. Even if we didn't speak of the other world, and there weren't the true statement of those venerable contemplatives & brahmans, this venerable person is still praised in the here-&-now by the observant as a person of good habits & right view: one who holds to a doctrine of existence.' If there really is a other world, then this venerable person has made a good throw twice, in that he is praised by the observant here-&-now; and in that — with the breakup of the body, after death — he will reappear in a good destination, a heavenly world. Thus this safe-bet teaching, when well grasped & adopted by him, covers both sides, and leaves behind the possibility of the unskillful.

https://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitak ... .than.html
The Blessed One said: "There is the case, student, where a woman or man is a killer of living beings, brutal, bloody-handed, given to killing & slaying, showing no mercy to living beings. Through having adopted & carried out such actions, on the break-up of the body, after death, he/she reappears in the plane of deprivation, the bad destination, the lower realms, hell. If, on the break-up of the body, after death — instead of reappearing in the plane of deprivation, the bad destination, the lower realms, hell — he/she comes to the human state, then he/she is short-lived wherever reborn. This is the way leading to a short life: to be a killer of living beings, brutal, bloody-handed, given to killing & slaying, showing no mercy to living beings.

https://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitak ... .than.html
I heard and learned this from the Blessed One’s own lips: ‘When the Bodhisatta passed away from the Tusita heaven and descended into his mother’s womb....

I heard and learned this from the Blessed One’s own lips: ‘When the Bodhisatta had descended into his mother’s womb, four young deities came to guard him at the four quarters so that no humans or non-humans or anyone at all could harm the Bodhisatta or his mother.’ This too I remember as a wonderful and marvelous quality of the Blessed One.

I heard and learned this from the Blessed One’s own lips: ‘As soon as the Bodhisatta was born, he stood firmly with his feet on the ground; then he took seven steps facing north, and with a white parasol held over him, he surveyed each quarter and uttered the words of the Leader of the Herd: “I am the highest in the world; I am the best in the world; I am the foremost in the world. This is my last birth; now there is no renewal of being for me.”’ This too I remember as a wonderful and marvelous quality of the Blessed One.

http://www.yellowrobe.com/component/con ... llous.html

User avatar
DooDoot
Posts: 2929
Joined: Tue Aug 08, 2017 11:06 pm

Re: What is the difference between Samma Sati and Yoniso Manasikara?

Post by DooDoot » Fri Feb 09, 2018 8:10 pm

:alien:
Last edited by DooDoot on Sat Feb 10, 2018 2:34 am, edited 3 times in total.

User avatar
Zom
Posts: 2148
Joined: Fri May 08, 2009 6:38 pm
Location: Russia, Saint-Petersburg
Contact:

Re: What is the difference between Samma Sati and Yoniso Manasikara?

Post by Zom » Fri Feb 09, 2018 8:26 pm

I am unable to find the word "lives" in the Pali in SN 13.1. Can you help me here?
I don't know pali well, so I won't help your here. But I think you can trust english translations .)
As I originally suggested, if I did not believe "I" will be reincarnated, I cannot imagine any reasons or incentive for doing good kamma. What would I fear if it was not "me" that was reincarnated?
And why don't you fear that now you fall asleep and on the next day not you but someone else will awake? -) Same with rebirth.

Anyway, it seems you confuse two types of truth - conventional and absolute. From conventional point of view, "Self" exists. From absolute, ultimate, it does not. Conventional self is just a living being. But inside that living being there is no ultimate self. Just ever-changing heap of constructions.

“Why now do you assume ‘a being’?
Mara, is that your speculative view?
This is a heap of sheer formations:
Here no being is found.

“Just as, with an assemblage of parts,
The word ‘chariot’ is used,
So, when the aggregates exist,
There is the convention ‘a being.’

User avatar
DooDoot
Posts: 2929
Joined: Tue Aug 08, 2017 11:06 pm

Re: What is the difference between Samma Sati and Yoniso Manasikara?

Post by DooDoot » Fri Feb 09, 2018 8:36 pm

Zom wrote:
Fri Feb 09, 2018 8:26 pm
And why don't you fear that now you fall asleep and on the next day not you but someone else will awake? -) Same with rebirth.
It was you who suggested I post MN 2, which states ideas of "I will be in the future"; "I was in the past" are inappropriate attention and it was you that posted there is no self. But now you are posting some incomprehensible ideas about you fall asleep and on the next day not you but someone else will awake? -) Same with rebirth.. :shrug:

If I went to work today knowing some one else would get paid for my work tomorrow, I would not bother going to work. I imagine the same with reincarnation. The same self must believe they will be reincarnated otherwise the will not do the work for a good reincarnation.
Zom wrote:
Fri Feb 09, 2018 8:26 pm
I don't know pali well, so I won't help your here. But I think you can trust english translations .
Then maybe you should think twice before posting things you don't know well. In my experience, I cannot trust translations.
Zom wrote:
Fri Feb 09, 2018 8:26 pm
. Conventional self is just a living being. But inside that living being there is no ultimate self. Just ever-changing heap of constructions.

“Why now do you assume ‘a being’?
Mara, is that your speculative view?
This is a heap of sheer formations:
Here no being is found.

“Just as, with an assemblage of parts,
The word ‘chariot’ is used,
So, when the aggregates exist,
There is the convention ‘a being.’
The idea of "living being" does not appear to exist above. The above seems to say "a being" is merely a wrong view, a word, a convention or an idea (thought construct). Maybe SN 23.2 can help avoid having the same wrong view as Mara.
Any desire, passion, delight, or craving for form, Radha: when one is caught up[1] there, tied up[2] there, one is said to be 'a being.'

SN 23.3
Last edited by DooDoot on Fri Feb 09, 2018 8:51 pm, edited 2 times in total.

User avatar
Zom
Posts: 2148
Joined: Fri May 08, 2009 6:38 pm
Location: Russia, Saint-Petersburg
Contact:

Re: What is the difference between Samma Sati and Yoniso Manasikara?

Post by Zom » Fri Feb 09, 2018 8:49 pm

It was you who suggested I post MN 2, which states ideas of "I will be in the future"; "I was in the past" are inappropriate attention
Yes, these are Ayoniso Manasikara, because these are questions about "self" status (in ultimate, not conventional sense). This is why they are listed as "Ayoniso" there - and not because someone thinks about his previous or future lives ,)
If I went to work today knowing some one else would get paid for my work tomorrow, I would not bother going to work. I imagine the same with reincarnation.
Again, why don't you think that tomorrow someone another will wake up and not you? Same with reincarnation. This will be you, not someone else.
Then maybe you should think twice before posting things you don't know well. In my experience, I cannot trust translations.
Do you mean that Ven. Bodhi, for example, is a bad and unskilful translator? 8-) Anyway, texts do speak about 7 lives for a stream-winner, who has right views, not wrong ones.
The idea of "living being" does not appear to exist above. The above seems to say "a being" is merely a wrong view
So, when the aggregates exist,
There is the convention ‘a being.’

That means you can use both words here: "A being" or "A heap of aggregates".

User avatar
DooDoot
Posts: 2929
Joined: Tue Aug 08, 2017 11:06 pm

Re: What is the difference between Samma Sati and Yoniso Manasikara?

Post by DooDoot » Fri Feb 09, 2018 8:58 pm

Zom wrote:
Fri Feb 09, 2018 8:49 pm
Yes, these are Ayoniso Manasikara, because these are questions about "self" status (in ultimate, not conventional sense). This is why they are listed as "Ayoniso" there - and not because someone thinks about his previous or future lives ,)
"His" future lives??? Is not "his" a "self-view"; the type of view proper attention destroys?
Zom wrote:
Fri Feb 09, 2018 8:49 pm
Again, why don't you think that tomorrow someone another will wake up and not you? Same with reincarnation. This will be you, not someone else.
Yes but this is a self-view.
Zom wrote:
Fri Feb 09, 2018 8:49 pm
Do you mean that Ven. Bodhi, for example, is a bad and unskilful translator? :|
Imperfect, probably. For example below appear to be false or questionable translation from merely one sutta. Why don't you start a new discussion topic on the subject.
And what, bhikkhus, is birth? The birth of the various beings into the various orders of beings, their being born, descent into the womb, production, the manifestation of the aggregates, the obtaining of the sense bases. This is called birth.

And what, bhikkhus, is existence? There are these three kinds of existence: sense-sphere existence, form-sphere existence, formless-sphere existence. This is called existence

And what, bhikkhus, is name-and-form? Feeling, perception, volition, contact, attention: this is called name. The four sn.ii.4 great elements and the form derived from the four great elements: this is called form. Thus this name and this form are together called name-and-form.

And what, bhikkhus, are the volitional formations? There are these three kinds of volitional formations: the bodily volitional formation, the verbal volitional formation, the mental volitional formation. These are called the volitional formations.

https://suttacentral.net/en/sn12.2
:alien:
Zom wrote:
Fri Feb 09, 2018 8:49 pm
So, when the aggregates exist,
There is the convention ‘a being.’

That means you can use both words here: "A being" or "A heap of aggregates".
This sounds like the view of Mara the bhikkhuni refutes. To me, the sutta says the aggregates are not "a being"; that "a being" is merely "a view", "word" or "convention". Again, refer to SN 23.2:
Any desire, passion, delight, or craving for form, Radha: when one is caught up there, tied up[ there, one is said to be 'a being.'

"Any desire, passion, delight, or craving for feeling... perception... fabrications...

"Any desire, passion, delight, or craving for consciousness, Radha: when one is caught up there, tied up there, one is said to be 'a being.'

https://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitak ... .than.html
Last edited by DooDoot on Fri Feb 09, 2018 9:04 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
Zom
Posts: 2148
Joined: Fri May 08, 2009 6:38 pm
Location: Russia, Saint-Petersburg
Contact:

Re: What is the difference between Samma Sati and Yoniso Manasikara?

Post by Zom » Fri Feb 09, 2018 9:02 pm

"His" future lives??? Is not "his" a "self-view"; the type of view proper attention destroys?
No, this is not a self-view.
Yes but this is a self-view.
No, this is not.
Imperfect, probably.
Doesn't matter. A stream-winner is not an arahant who will not reborn after death. All non-arahant ariyas will reborn somewhere. And they all have right views.

User avatar
DooDoot
Posts: 2929
Joined: Tue Aug 08, 2017 11:06 pm

Re: What is the difference between Samma Sati and Yoniso Manasikara?

Post by DooDoot » Fri Feb 09, 2018 9:07 pm

Zom wrote:
Fri Feb 09, 2018 9:02 pm
No, this is not a self-view.
Is English your native language?
Zom wrote:
Fri Feb 09, 2018 9:02 pm
Doesn't matter. A stream-winner is not an arahant who will not reborn after death.
Where do the suttas say an arahant is not reborn after death? SN 22.85 & many other suttas appear to refute the idea that an arahant or Tathagata exist or do not exist after death. Do the suttas say arahants are subject to death? Does any sutta say noble disciples are subject to 'death' ('marana')? The Dhammapada says the heedful do not die. Are you saying stream-enterers are heedless?
Zom wrote:
Fri Feb 09, 2018 9:02 pm
All non-arahant ariyas will reborn somewhere. And they all have right views.
Questionable idea. More evidence is required.

User avatar
Nicolas
Posts: 811
Joined: Wed Jul 02, 2014 8:59 pm
Location: Somerville, MA, USA

Re: What is the difference between Samma Sati and Yoniso Manasikara?

Post by Nicolas » Fri Feb 09, 2018 9:18 pm

The non-arahant stream-winner still has the conceit "I am".
Kosambī Sutta (SN 12.68) wrote: Friend, though I have clearly seen as it really is with correct wisdom, ‘Nibbāna is the cessation of existence [bhava],’ I am not an arahant, one whose taints are destroyed. Suppose, friend, there was a well along a desert road, but it had neither a rope nor a bucket. Then a man would come along, oppressed and afflicted by the heat, tired, parched, and thirsty. He would look down into the well and the knowledge would occur to him, ‘There is water,’ but he would not be able to make bodily contact with it. So too, friend, though I have clearly seen as it really is with correct wisdom, ‘Nibbāna is the cessation of existence,’ I am not an arahant, one whose taints are destroyed.
Paṭhamaabhabbaṭṭhāna Sutta (AN 6.92) wrote: abhabbo diṭṭhisampanno puggalo aṭṭhamaṃ bhavaṃ nibbattetuṃ.
One accomplished in view is incapable of undergoing an eighth existence [bhava]. (Bodhi)

User avatar
DooDoot
Posts: 2929
Joined: Tue Aug 08, 2017 11:06 pm

Re: What is the difference between Samma Sati and Yoniso Manasikara?

Post by DooDoot » Fri Feb 09, 2018 9:28 pm

Nicolas wrote:
Fri Feb 09, 2018 9:18 pm
The non-arahant stream-winner still has the conceit "I am".
It is probably proper to say a stream-winner has not uprooted the conceit "I am". Obviously, the stream-winner abides often without the conceit of "I am".
Nicolas wrote:
Fri Feb 09, 2018 9:18 pm
Paṭhamaabhabbaṭṭhāna Sutta (AN 6.92) wrote: abhabbo diṭṭhisampanno puggalo aṭṭhamaṃ bhavaṃ nibbattetuṃ.
One accomplished in view is incapable of undergoing an eighth existence [bhava]. (Bodhi)
The issue here is "bhava" does not appear to mean "reincarnation"; also "nibbattetuṃ". In the suttas, "bhava" appears to be an "asava" or "defilement".
Last edited by DooDoot on Fri Feb 09, 2018 9:38 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
Zom
Posts: 2148
Joined: Fri May 08, 2009 6:38 pm
Location: Russia, Saint-Petersburg
Contact:

Re: What is the difference between Samma Sati and Yoniso Manasikara?

Post by Zom » Fri Feb 09, 2018 9:37 pm

Do the suttas say arahants are subject to death?
Don't you know that Buddha died? And such arahants as Moggallana and Sariputta too, eh, unforunately -)

User avatar
DooDoot
Posts: 2929
Joined: Tue Aug 08, 2017 11:06 pm

Re: What is the difference between Samma Sati and Yoniso Manasikara?

Post by DooDoot » Fri Feb 09, 2018 9:39 pm

Zom wrote:
Fri Feb 09, 2018 9:37 pm
Don't you know that Buddha died? -)
:roll: Buddhas do not die (MN 140; MN 38; SN 22.85; Dhp 21).

Time to go for me. Time for you to study more rather than exchange "folk Buddhism" with Pariyatti students. :reading:
Last edited by DooDoot on Fri Feb 09, 2018 9:42 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
Nicolas
Posts: 811
Joined: Wed Jul 02, 2014 8:59 pm
Location: Somerville, MA, USA

Re: What is the difference between Samma Sati and Yoniso Manasikara?

Post by Nicolas » Fri Feb 09, 2018 9:40 pm

DooDoot wrote:
Fri Feb 09, 2018 9:28 pm
Nicolas wrote:
Fri Feb 09, 2018 9:18 pm
The non-arahant stream-winner still has the conceit "I am".
It is probably proper to say a stream-winner has not uprooted the conceit "I am". Obviously, the stream-winner abides often without the conceit of "I am".
Yes, my apologies, yours is the correct phrasing, and the one I intended: the stream-winner has not uprooted the conceit "I am".

I can't find the full AN 6.92 sutta translated by Ven. Bodhi online, but here's Sister Uppalavanna's:
Sīti Vagga (AN 6.85-95) wrote: Bhikkhus, these six are impossibilities. What six?
It is not possible that one come to right view should abide unruly not revering the Teacher, the Teaching, the Community of bhikkhus and the training. It is not possible that one come to right view should anticipate the future. It is not possible that one come to right view should be born the eighth time.
Bhikkhus, these six are impossibilities.
The following sutta might also be of use:
Khemaka Sutta (SN 22.89) wrote: The Venerable Khemaka replied: “These five aggregates subject to clinging have been spoken of by the Blessed One; that is, the form aggregate subject to clinging … the consciousness aggregate subject to clinging. I do not regard anything among these five aggregates subject to clinging as self or as belonging to self, yet I am not an arahant, one whose taints are destroyed. Friends, the notion ‘I am’ has not yet vanished in me in relation to these five aggregates subject to clinging, but I do not regard anything among them as ‘This I am.’”

[...]

Friend Khemaka, when you speak of this “I am”—what is it that you speak of as “I am”? Do you speak of form as “I am,” or do you speak of “I am” apart from form? Do you speak of feeling … of perception … of volitional formations … of consciousness as “I am,” or do you speak of “I am” apart from consciousness? When you speak of this “I am,” friend Khemaka, what is it that you speak of as “I am”?’”

“Friends, I do not speak of form as ‘I am,’ nor do I speak of ‘I am’ apart from form. I do not speak of feeling as ‘I am’ … nor of perception as ‘I am’ … nor of volitional formations as ‘I am’ … nor of consciousness as ‘I am,’ nor do I speak of ‘I am’ apart from consciousness. Friends, although the notion ‘I am’ has not yet vanished in me in relation to these five aggregates subject to clinging, still I do not regard anything among them as ‘This I am.’

“Suppose, friends, there is the scent of a blue, red, or white lotus. Would one be speaking rightly if one would say, ‘The scent belongs to the petals,’ or ‘The scent belongs to the stalk,’ or ‘The scent belongs to the pistils’?”

“No, friend.”

“And how, friends, should one answer if one is to answer rightly?”

“Answering rightly, friend, one should answer: ‘The scent belongs to the flower.’”

“So too, friends, I do not speak of form as ‘I am,’ nor do I speak of ‘I am’ apart from form. I do not speak of feeling as ‘I am’ … nor of perception as ‘I am’ … nor of volitional formations as ‘I am’ … nor of consciousness as ‘I am,’ nor do I speak of ‘I am’ apart from consciousness. Friends, although the notion ‘I am’ has not yet vanished in me in relation to these five aggregates subject to clinging, still I do not regard anything among them as ‘This I am.’

“Friends, even though a noble disciple has abandoned the five lower fetters, still, in relation to the five aggregates subject to clinging, there lingers in him a residual conceit ‘I am,’ a desire ‘I am,’ an underlying tendency ‘I am’ that has not yet been uprooted. Sometime later he dwells contemplating rise and fall in the five aggregates subject to clinging: ‘Such is form, such its origin, such its passing away; such is feeling … such is perception … such are volitional formations … such is consciousness, such its origin, such its passing away.’ As he dwells thus contemplating rise and fall in the five aggregates subject to clinging, the residual conceit ‘I am,’ the desire ‘I am,’ the underlying tendency ‘I am’ that had not yet been uprooted—this comes to be uprooted.

“Suppose, friends, a cloth has become soiled and stained, and its owners give it to a laundryman. The laundryman would scour it evenly with cleaning salt, lye, or cowdung, and rinse it in clean water. Even though that cloth would become pure and clean, it would still retain a residual smell of cleaning salt, lye, or cowdung that had not yet vanished. The laundryman would then give it back to the owners. The owners would put it in a sweet-scented casket, and the residual smell of cleaning salt, lye, or cowdung that had not yet vanished would vanish.

“So too, friends, even though a noble disciple has abandoned the five lower fetters, still, in relation to the five aggregates subject to clinging, there lingers in him a residual conceit ‘I am,’ a desire ‘I am,’ an underlying tendency ‘I am’ that has not yet been uprooted…. As he dwells thus contemplating rise and fall in the five aggregates subject to clinging, the residual conceit ‘I am,’ the desire ‘I am,’ the underlying tendency ‘I am’ that had not yet been uprooted—this comes to be uprooted.”

User avatar
DooDoot
Posts: 2929
Joined: Tue Aug 08, 2017 11:06 pm

Re: What is the difference between Samma Sati and Yoniso Manasikara?

Post by DooDoot » Fri Feb 09, 2018 9:45 pm

Nicolas wrote:
Fri Feb 09, 2018 9:40 pm
I can't find the full AN 6.92 sutta translated by Ven. Bodhi online, but here's Sister Uppalavanna's:
Sīti Vagga (AN 6.85-95) wrote: Bhikkhus, these six are impossibilities. What six?
It is not possible that one come to right view should abide unruly not revering the Teacher, the Teaching, the Community of bhikkhus and the training. It is not possible that one come to right view should anticipate the future. It is not possible that one come to right view should be born the eighth time.
Bhikkhus, these six are impossibilities.
Its OK. As I previously belatedly posted, in the suttas, "bhava" appears to be an "asava" or "defilement". "Bhava" appears to not mean to be "born".
Last edited by DooDoot on Fri Feb 09, 2018 9:46 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
Zom
Posts: 2148
Joined: Fri May 08, 2009 6:38 pm
Location: Russia, Saint-Petersburg
Contact:

Re: What is the difference between Samma Sati and Yoniso Manasikara?

Post by Zom » Fri Feb 09, 2018 9:46 pm

Buddhas do not die
And what happened in Kusinara then? 8-)

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: AgarikaJ, gonflable, WindDancer, Yahoo [Bot] and 101 guests