Does Tevijja belongs to Buddhism only ?

[sentinel]

Greetings ,

Does the Tevijja or Three Knowledges is exclusively belong to Buddhism only ?

The first is the knowledge of past lives wherein one sees with great clarity and in detail of one's former lives.

The second is the knowledge of the arising and passing away of beings according to their kamma.

The third is the knowledge of the destruction of the mental defilements ; sensual desire, desire for continued existence, ignorance and originating.

In contrast , In Brahmanism, a priest who has mastered the three Vedas was said to have a threefold knowledge.

And in Jainism , there seems to contain of
three Knowledges also.
1.Knowledge of previous lives.
2.Knowledge of the mystery behind the cycle of birth and death.
3.Knowledge of what is conscious mind (Chitta) and how to purify it.

[Dhammarakkhito]

idk about the second one, but the first one as i recall is not exclusive to buddhism, and you may look in DN 1
the third one is definitely exclusive to buddhism. you cant attain non return without confirmed confidence in triple gem

[paul]

“The 6 'higher powers', or supernormal knowledges, consist of 5 mundane (lokiya, q.v.) powers attainable through the utmost perfection in mental concentration (samádhi, q.v.) and one supermundane (lokuttara, q.v.) power attainable through penetrating insight (vipassaná, q.v.), i.e. extinction of all cankers (ásavakkhaya; s. ásava), in other words, realization of Arahatship or Holiness. They are: (1) magical powers (iddhi-vidha), (2) divine ear (dibba-sota), (3) penetration of the minds of others (ceto-pariya-ñána), (4) remembrance of former existences (pubbe-nivásánussati), (5) divine eye (dibba-cakkhu), (6) extinction of all cankers (ásavakkhaya). The stereotype text met with in all the 4 Sutta-collections (e.g. D. 34; M. 4, 6, 77; A. III, 99; V, 23; S. XV, 9 and Pug. 271, 239)
[…]
(6) "Through the extinction of all cankers (ásavakkhaya) even in this very life he enters into the possession of deliverance of mind, deliverance through wisdom, after having himself understood and realized it.’'

4-6 appear frequently under the name of the 'threefold (higher) knowledge' (te-vijjá, q.v.). They are, however, not a necessary condition for the attainment of sainthood (arahatta), i.e. of the sixth abhiññá.”—-“Buddhist Dictionary”, Nyanatiloka.

The sixth (super mundane) power is the unique discovery of the Buddha, and is what distinguishes Buddhism from other Indian religious forms, which are limited to jhana.

[DooDoot]

the first one as i recall is not exclusive to buddhism

The version explained in SN 22.79 appears to be exclusive to Buddhism.

[Dhammarakkhito]

not to me, it appears that it says 'ascetics and brahmans'
here from DN 1
an explanation of which christianity makes a lot more sense to me
there is another place in digha nikaya talking about seeing past lives, how some see more but i didnt index those suttas XD
btw, suttacentral kinda sux now! what's up with that?

[DooDoot]

here from DN 1

This is a translation. The same Pali is in SN 22.79 however the translations we posted from DN 1 and SN 22.79 are different.

Because by dint of keen, resolute, committed, and diligent effort, and right focus I experience an immersion of the heart of such a kind that I recollect my many kinds of past lives, with features and details.

ātappamanvāya padhānamanvāya anuyogamanvāya appamādamanvāya sammāmanasikāramanvāya tathārūpaṃ cetosamādhiṃ phusāmi, yathāsamāhite citte anekavihitaṃ pubbenivāsaṃ anussarāmi.

DN 1 https://suttacentral.net/dn1/en/sujato

Ye hi keci, bhikkhave, samaṇā vā brāhmaṇā vā anekavihitaṃ pubbenivāsaṃ anussaramānā anussaranti sabbete pañcupādānakkhandhe anussaranti etesaṃ vā aññataraṃ

At Savatthi. “Bhikkhus, those ascetics and brahmins who recollect their manifold past abodes all recollect the five aggregates subject to clinging or a certain one among them. What five?

When recollecting thus, bhikkhus: ‘I had such form in the past,’ it is just form that one recollects. When recollecting: ‘I had such a feeling in the past,’ it is just feeling that one recollects. When recollecting: ‘I had such a perception in the past,’ it is just perception that one recollects. When recollecting: ‘I had such volitional formations in the past,’ it is just volitional formations that one recollects. When recollecting: ‘I had such consciousness in the past,’ it is just consciousness that one recollects.

SN 22.79

[Dhammarakkhito]

oh, are you saying that the recollection is not as detailed?

[DooDoot]

oh, are you saying that the recollection is not as detailed?

I am saying the word 'nivāsa' was not translated as "lives" by Bhikkhu Bodhi in his translation of SN 22.79.

Also, the explanation of what this 'recollection' is is explained differently & precisely in SN 22.79 (compared to the vague explanation in DN 1); in that SN 22.79 accords with the Buddhist doctrine that the five aggregates are not-self (anatta):

When recollecting thus, bhikkhus: ‘I had such form in the past,’ it is just form that one recollects. When recollecting: ‘I had such a feeling in the past,’ it is just feeling that one recollects. When recollecting: ‘I had such a perception in the past,’ it is just perception that one recollects. When recollecting: ‘I had such volitional formations in the past,’ it is just volitional formations that one recollects. When recollecting: ‘I had such consciousness in the past,’ it is just consciousness that one recollects.

SN 22.79

Therefore, do the other Indian religions have a recollection of past "lives" in terms of 'anatta'; similar to as described in SN 22.79? I doubt it. SN 22.79 says whatever is recollected from the past; it is properly recollected as mere form, mere feeling, mere perception, mere formations, mere consciousness &, most importantly, mere not-self.

Therefore, bhikkhus, any kind of form whatsoever … Any kind of feeling whatsoever … Any kind of perception whatsoever … Any kind of volitional formations whatsoever … Any kind of consciousness whatsoever, whether past, future, or present, internal or external, gross or subtle, inferior or superior, far or near, all consciousness should be seen as it really is with correct wisdom thus: ‘This is not mine, this I am not, this is not my self.’

SN 22.79

[Dhammarakkhito]

seems like a turn of phrase
"Usually in phrase pubbe-nivāsaṃ anussarati “to remember one’s former abode or place of existence (in a former life),” characterising the faculty of remembering one’s former birth"
see also DN 2 https://suttacentral.net/dn2/en/bodhi translated by ven bodhi as lives, similar turn of phrase

[DooDoot]

seems like a turn of phrase

We have read these teachings a thousand times. There is no need to post them. They are just mere translations. If you wish to examine the difference between Buddhism & other religions about Tevijja I suggest to examine the relevant Pali words and particularly how they are used in other contexts in the suttas. Otherwise, you own personal views may end up being those of the other religions rather than the views of Buddhism. Regards

[sentinel]

Therefore, do the other Indian religions have a recollection of past "lives" in terms of 'anatta'; similar to as described in SN 22.79? I doubt it. SN 22.79 says whatever is recollected from the past; it is properly recollected as mere form, mere feeling, mere perception, mere formations, mere consciousness &, most importantly, mere not-self.

There is a question with regard to this , which is , if one is able to See Clearly the five aggregate in terms of Anatta in this Very Life , why would you want to or had to Attain one of the Tevijja (which is recollection of Previous Lives in terms of five aggregate with its Anatta characteristic) for what purpose ? Many arahant can't recollect their past life due to absence of psychic ability .
It just makes No Sense when you already know and understand !

[paul]

The relevance of two higher mundane knowledges as a contrast to the third super mundane (vipassana) knowledge:

"Rebirth has always been a central teaching in the Buddhist tradition. The earliest records in the Pali Canon indicate that the Buddha, prior to his awakening, searched for a happiness not subject to the vagaries of repeated birth, aging, illness, and death. One of the reasons he left his early teachers was because he recognized that their teachings led, not to the goal he sought, but to rebirth on a refined level.

On the night of his awakening, two of the three knowledges leading to his release from suffering focused on the topic of rebirth. The first showed his own many previous lives; the second, depicting the general pattern of beings dying and being reborn throughout the cosmos, showed the connection between rebirth and karma, or action.

When he did finally attain release from suffering, he recognized that he had achieved his goal because he had touched a dimension that not only was free from birth, but also had freed him from ever being reborn again. After he had attained release, his new-found freedom from rebirth was the first realization that occurred spontaneously to his mind."---Thanissaro Bikkhu.

[justindesilva]

The relevance of two higher mundane knowledges as a contrast to the third super mundane (vipassana) knowledge:

"Rebirth has always been a central teaching in the Buddhist tradition. The earliest records in the Pali Canon indicate that the Buddha, prior to his awakening, searched for a happiness not subject to the vagaries of repeated birth, aging, illness, and death. One of the reasons he left his early teachers was because he recognized that their teachings led, not to the goal he sought, but to rebirth on a refined level.

On the night of his awakening, two of the three knowledges leading to his release from suffering focused on the topic of rebirth. The first showed his own many previous lives; the second, depicting the general pattern of beings dying and being reborn throughout the cosmos, showed the connection between rebirth and karma, or action.

When he did finally attain release from suffering, he recognized that he had achieved his goal because he had touched a dimension that not only was free from birth, but also had freed him from ever being reborn again. After he had attained release, his new-found freedom from rebirth was the first realization that occurred spontaneously to his mind."---Thanissaro Bikkhu.

Thank you Paul for this valuable posting . But I still have two questions. Is the 3rd vijja , described by Vidya carana sampanno as a quality of budda or does it describe all 3 vijja ( vidya) of lord budda. Or am I totally gone stray in this posting.

[paul]

Thanissaro’s explanation reveals the reason the three higher knowledges are grouped together is not because the three knowledges as a group are necessary for liberation, but rather to demonstrate the contrast between the cyclic existence of samsara and the unconditioned state of nibbana. As stated, the first thought that occurred to the Buddha after liberation was that he was free from the cyclic condition of rebirth. It should be pointed out that samsara does not consist only of the major cycle of birth, death and rebirth, but also numerous smaller cycles, often referred to by the Buddha as the currents of existence and the first stage of right view necessitates awareness of those currents.

The division between the two mundane higher knowledges and the sixth abhinna (vipassana) is really the difference between serenity and insight, and it is possible to practice insight with only access concentration, emphasising that some samadhi is necessary for panna to function. The vipassana process can be likened to a surgeon who can only operate when the patient is tranquillised, and so with insight in its penetration of the mind. This penetration is what is meant in the Satipatthana sutta where it instructs to investigate mental qualities to see how there is the arising of the hindrances and how there is the abandoning of them etc.

The inclination towards either serenity or insight depends on temperament:
"Then there is the case where a monk has developed tranquillity preceded by insight. As he develops tranquillity preceded by insight, the path is born. He follows that path, develops it, pursues it. As he follows the path, developing it & pursuing it — his fetters are abandoned, his obsessions destroyed.”—-AN 4:170

[2600htz]

Hello:

About the answer "Does Tevijja belongs to Buddhism only ?" i would answer that last one () is obviously exclusively buddhist, the first two () where according to suttas wielded by some beings, like in - MN 49 Brahma-nimantanika Sutta: The Brahma Invitation, unless im missing something.

"'As far as suns & moons revolve,
shining, illuminating the directions,
over a thousand-fold world
your control holds sway.
There you know those above & below,
those with lust & those without,
the state of what is as it is,
the state of what becomes otherwise,
the coming & going of beings.

But i think this first two skills where experienced a little different by a disciples of the Buddha and beings that attained them by good kamma,
they didn´t have "cessation" or the same kind of insights into the process.

Regards.