Who put's down the burden ?

A forum for members who wish to develop a deeper understanding of the Pali Canon and associated Commentaries, which for discussion purposes are both treated as authoritative.
User avatar
retrofuturist
Site Admin
Posts: 23095
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 9:52 pm
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Contact:

Re: Who put's down the burden ?

Post by retrofuturist »

Greetings rightviewftw,

Those two statements do not appear contradictory.

The eye itself does not conceive etc., but through the eye in the world, once conceives etc.

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

"It is natural that one who knows and sees things as they really are is disenchanted and dispassionate." (AN 10.2)

"Overcome the liar by truth." (Dhp 223)
User avatar
rightviewftw
Posts: 2625
Joined: Mon Jan 01, 2018 8:50 pm

Re: Who put's down the burden ?

Post by rightviewftw »

retrofuturist wrote: Thu Jan 31, 2019 5:02 am Greetings rightviewftw,

Those two statements do not appear contradictory.

The eye itself does not conceive etc., but through the eye in the world, once conceives etc.

Metta,
Paul. :)
The point is not the eye perceives the world but that the world is not conceived and perceived by one aggregate namely sankhara as DooDoo has stated.
Last edited by rightviewftw on Thu Jan 31, 2019 5:15 am, edited 1 time in total.
'Bhikkhus, possessing three qualities, a bhikkhu is practicing the unmistaken way and has laid the groundwork for the destruction of the taints. What three? Here, a bhikkhu guards the doors of the sense faculties, observes moderation in eating, and is intent on wakefulness. He should develop perception of unattractiveness so as to abandon lust... good will so as to abandon ill will... mindfulness of in-&-out breathing so as to cut off distractive thinking... the perception of inconstancy so as to uproot the conceit, 'I am.
Srilankaputra
Posts: 1060
Joined: Tue Nov 06, 2018 3:56 am
Location: Sri Lanka

Re: Who put's down the burden ?

Post by Srilankaputra »

Hi everyone,

As the the OP of this thread i would like to say some thing. I welcome all opinions. But as any self respecting person i make up my own mind. I'm asking not necessarily to get educated but to consider other possibilities.

Thank you! and carry on. :twothumbsup:
O seeing one,we for refuge go to thee!
O mighty sage do thou our teacher be!

Paccuppannañca yo dhammaṃ,
Tattha tattha vipassati

“Yato yato mano nivāraye,
Na dukkhameti naṃ tato tato;
Sa sabbato mano nivāraye,
Sa sabbato dukkhā pamuccatī”ti.
User avatar
DooDoot
Posts: 8616
Joined: Tue Aug 08, 2017 11:06 pm

Re: Who put's down the burden ?

Post by DooDoot »

rightviewftw wrote: Thu Jan 31, 2019 4:58 am
DooDoot wrote: Wed Jan 30, 2019 8:55 pm Friend. The eye does not "conceive" ("mānī"' "mana"; "maññati") .
Through the eye in the world you perceive the world and conceive the world.
Cakkhunā kho, āvuso, lokasmiṃ lokasaññī hoti lokamānī.
Consider this discourse carefully
Friend.

THE EYE DOES NOT CONCEIVE. CONCEIVING IS A THOUGHT FUNCTION. THE EYE DOES NOT THINK. THE EYE IS A PHYSICAL THING. THE EYE DOES NOT CONCEIVE.

FOR EXAMPLE, WHEN THE MIND SEES A TREE THRU A WINDOW AND THINKS: "THIS TREE IS BEAUTIFUL", IT IS NOT THE WINDOW, MADE FROM GLASS, THAT IS CONCEIVING.
Through a window in the world you perceive the world and conceive the world.
:focus:
rightviewftw wrote: Thu Jan 31, 2019 5:10 am The point is not the eye perceives the world but that the world is not conceived and perceived by one aggregate namely sankhara as DooDoo has stated.
No. The eye does not perceive. It is sanna khandha that perceives. :geek:
Last edited by DooDoot on Thu Jan 31, 2019 5:19 am, edited 2 times in total.
There is always an official executioner. If you try to take his place, It is like trying to be a master carpenter and cutting wood. If you try to cut wood like a master carpenter, you will only hurt your hand.

https://soundcloud.com/doodoot/paticcasamuppada
https://soundcloud.com/doodoot/anapanasati
User avatar
retrofuturist
Site Admin
Posts: 23095
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 9:52 pm
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Contact:

Re: Who put's down the burden ?

Post by retrofuturist »

Greetings Rightviewftw,
rightviewftw wrote: Thu Jan 31, 2019 5:10 am Have you heard of dependent origination of phenomena?
Yes, and it is through that process that I would contend that salayatana itself is an ignorant conception of an "eye in the world", but I shan't pursue that any further here, since it's a view probably at odds with the classical Theravāda position.

:focus:

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

"It is natural that one who knows and sees things as they really are is disenchanted and dispassionate." (AN 10.2)

"Overcome the liar by truth." (Dhp 223)
User avatar
rightviewftw
Posts: 2625
Joined: Mon Jan 01, 2018 8:50 pm

Re: Who put's down the burden ?

Post by rightviewftw »

DooDoot wrote: Thu Jan 31, 2019 5:15 am
rightviewftw wrote: Thu Jan 31, 2019 4:58 am
DooDoot wrote: Wed Jan 30, 2019 8:55 pm Friend. The eye does not "conceive" ("mānī"' "mana"; "maññati") .
Through the eye in the world you perceive the world and conceive the world.
Cakkhunā kho, āvuso, lokasmiṃ lokasaññī hoti lokamānī.
Consider this discourse carefully
Friend.

THE EYE DOES NOT CONCEIVE. CONCEIVING IS A THOUGHT FUNCTION. THE EYE DOES NOT THINK. THE EYE IS A PHYSICAL THING. THE EYE DOES NOT CONCEIVE.

FOR EXAMPLE, WHEN THE MIND SEES A TREE THRU A WINDOW AND THINKS: "THIS TREE IS BEAUTIFUL", IT IS NOT THE WINDOW, MADE FROM GLASS, THAT IS CONCEIVING.

:focus:
The point is that Eye is dependently arisen and you are wrong when you say;
I say the world is conceived by only one aggregate, namely, sankhara aggregate.
'Bhikkhus, possessing three qualities, a bhikkhu is practicing the unmistaken way and has laid the groundwork for the destruction of the taints. What three? Here, a bhikkhu guards the doors of the sense faculties, observes moderation in eating, and is intent on wakefulness. He should develop perception of unattractiveness so as to abandon lust... good will so as to abandon ill will... mindfulness of in-&-out breathing so as to cut off distractive thinking... the perception of inconstancy so as to uproot the conceit, 'I am.
User avatar
DooDoot
Posts: 8616
Joined: Tue Aug 08, 2017 11:06 pm

Re: Who put's down the burden ?

Post by DooDoot »

rightviewftw wrote: Thu Jan 31, 2019 5:17 am The point is that Eye is dependently arisen and you are wrong when you say;
I say the world is conceived by only one aggregate, namely, sankhara aggregate.
You are entitled to your view but what you are saying above has no real meaning. Its just empty words. The eye is a physical thing. It does not perceive or conceive. However, the eye can be defiled so the mind does not see, via the eye, clearly; in the same way a window can be defiled by dust or dirt or rain. Because of the dust, dirt or rain, the mind cannot see thru the window clearly and thus misapprehends the objects seen thru the window.

Let us quote the suttas:
To an uninstructed, run-of-the-mill person, touched by that which is felt born of contact with ignorance, craving arises. That fabrication is born of that.

SN 22.81
Last edited by DooDoot on Thu Jan 31, 2019 5:27 am, edited 1 time in total.
There is always an official executioner. If you try to take his place, It is like trying to be a master carpenter and cutting wood. If you try to cut wood like a master carpenter, you will only hurt your hand.

https://soundcloud.com/doodoot/paticcasamuppada
https://soundcloud.com/doodoot/anapanasati
User avatar
rightviewftw
Posts: 2625
Joined: Mon Jan 01, 2018 8:50 pm

Re: Who put's down the burden ?

Post by rightviewftw »

retrofuturist wrote: Thu Jan 31, 2019 5:17 am Greetings Rightviewftw,
rightviewftw wrote: Thu Jan 31, 2019 5:10 am Have you heard of dependent origination of phenomena?
Yes, and it is through that process, that I would contend that salayatana itself is an ignorant conception of an "eye in the world", but I shan't pursue that any further here, since it's a view probably at odds with the classical Theravāda position.

:focus:

Metta,
Paul. :)
There is no process. Eye-Element and the Form which is seen by the Eye are included in the Form Aggregate, Consciousness-Element is included in the Consciousness Aggregate. The meeting of Form, Form derived from Form and Consciousness is called Contact, Contact begets Feeling and Volitional Activities.

Without the contact there is no existence of any of these phenomena. It is called dependent origination because they don't exist by themselves, there is no process where one begets the other. Therefore the world is not only the Eye;
“Sir, they speak of this thing called ‘the world’. How is the world defined?” “Ānanda, that which wears out is called the world in the training of the noble one. And what wears out? The eye wears out. Sights … eye consciousness … eye contact wears out. The painful, pleasant, or neutral feeling that arises conditioned by eye contact also wears out. The ear … nose … tongue … body … The mind … thoughts … mind consciousness … mind contact wears out.
And what perceives is perception which is also dependently arisen. When there is contact one can delineate feeling, one can delineate perception, one can delineate consciousness which are conjoined.

These phenomena arise as one thing and cease as another, they don't even persist, they arise only to change.

Dependent Origination explains the Dependent Origination of the World itself. Therefore the Five Aggregates are the world and Cessation of the Aggregates is the Cessation of the World for there is nothing outside of Dependent Origination.
Last edited by rightviewftw on Thu Jan 31, 2019 5:38 am, edited 1 time in total.
'Bhikkhus, possessing three qualities, a bhikkhu is practicing the unmistaken way and has laid the groundwork for the destruction of the taints. What three? Here, a bhikkhu guards the doors of the sense faculties, observes moderation in eating, and is intent on wakefulness. He should develop perception of unattractiveness so as to abandon lust... good will so as to abandon ill will... mindfulness of in-&-out breathing so as to cut off distractive thinking... the perception of inconstancy so as to uproot the conceit, 'I am.
User avatar
DooDoot
Posts: 8616
Joined: Tue Aug 08, 2017 11:06 pm

Re: Who put's down the burden ?

Post by DooDoot »

rightviewftw wrote: Thu Jan 31, 2019 5:26 am Eye-Element and the Form which is seen by the Eye are included in the Form Aggregate
Yes, as follows:
And why, bhikkhus, do you call it form? ‘It is deformed,’ bhikkhus, therefore it is called form. Deformed by what? Deformed by cold, deformed by heat, deformed by hunger, deformed by thirst, deformed by contact with flies, mosquitoes, wind, sun, and serpents. ‘It is deformed,’ bhikkhus, therefore it is called form.

SN 22.79
:alien:
rightviewftw wrote: Thu Jan 31, 2019 5:26 amConsciousness-Element is included in the Consciousness Aggregate. The meeting of Form, Form derived from Form and Consciousness is called Contact
Yes but the form aggregate is not the consciousness aggregate. The following is not performed by the form aggregate:
And why, bhikkhus, do you call it consciousness? ‘It cognizes, ’ bhikkhus, therefore it is called consciousness. And what does it cognize? It cognizes sour, it cognizes bitter, it cognizes pungent, it cognizes sweet, it cognizes sharp, it cognizes mild, it cognizes salty, it cognizes bland. ‘It cognizes,’ bhikkhus, therefore it is called consciousness.

SN 22.79
:alien:
rightviewftw wrote: Thu Jan 31, 2019 5:26 amContact begets Feeling and Volitional Activities.
Maybe but contact is not feeling and contact is not activities. What is "conceived" or "constructed" is done not by contact nor by feeling but by activities, as follows:
And why, bhikkhus, do you call them formations? ‘They construct the conditioned,’ bhikkhus, therefore they are called formations. And what is the conditioned that they construct? They construct conditioned form as form; they construct conditioned feeling as feeling; they construct conditioned perception as perception; they construct conditioned formations as formations; they construct conditioned consciousness as consciousness. ‘They construct the conditioned,’ bhikkhus, therefore they are called formations.

SN 22.79
:alien:
rightviewftw wrote: Thu Jan 31, 2019 5:26 amWithout the contact there is no existence of any of these phenomena.
So what?
rightviewftw wrote: Thu Jan 31, 2019 5:26 amIt is called dependent origination because they don't exist by themselves, there is no process where one begets the other. Therefore the world is not only the Eye;
No. What is called the cessation of the world or the cessation of suffering also occurs with the arising of the eye, as follows:
"And what is the ending of the world? Dependent on the eye & forms there arises eye-consciousness. The meeting of the three is contact. From contact as a requisite condition comes feeling. From feeling as a requisite condition comes craving. Now, from the remainderless cessation & fading away of that very craving comes the cessation of clinging/sustenance. From the cessation of clinging/sustenance comes the cessation of becoming. From the cessation of becoming comes the cessation of birth. From the cessation of birth, then aging & death, sorrow, lamentation, pain, distress, & despair all cease. Such is the cessation of this entire mass of stress & suffering. This is the ending of the world.

SN 12.44
:alien:
rightviewftw wrote: Thu Jan 31, 2019 5:26 amAnd what perceives is perception which is also dependently arisen.
SN 12.3 says dependent origination is "the wrong path". Arahants perceive but are not on the wrong path. I do not recall the Buddha ever saying the cause of suffering is perception. I recall the Buddha said the cause of suffering and the cause of the world is craving. Craving, the same as conceiving, is by sankhara khandha.
rightviewftw wrote: Thu Jan 31, 2019 5:10 amThe point is not the eye perceives the world but that the world is not conceived and perceived by one aggregate namely sankhara as DooDoo has stated.
Non sequitur for three reasons:

1. You argued the eye conceives the world.

2. You argued the eye (rather than impermanence) is the world.

3. Perception does not conceive the world or cause suffering. It is sankhara aggregate that causes suffering.

Perception is the citta sankhara. It influences the citta to conceive the world in wrong ways but perception itself does not appear to be the problem.
“Bhikkhu, ‘I am’ is a conceiving; ‘I am this’ is a conceiving; ‘I shall be’ is a conceiving; ‘I shall not be’ is a conceiving; ‘I shall be possessed of form’ is a conceiving; ‘I shall be formless’ is a conceiving; ‘I shall be percipient’ is a conceiving; ‘I shall be non-percipient’ is a conceiving; ‘I shall be neither-percipient-nor-non-percipient’ is a conceiving. Conceiving is a disease, conceiving is a tumour, conceiving is a dart. By overcoming all conceivings, bhikkhu, one is called a sage at peace.

MN 140
:focus: ... about who or what puts down the burden?
Last edited by DooDoot on Thu Jan 31, 2019 5:40 am, edited 1 time in total.
There is always an official executioner. If you try to take his place, It is like trying to be a master carpenter and cutting wood. If you try to cut wood like a master carpenter, you will only hurt your hand.

https://soundcloud.com/doodoot/paticcasamuppada
https://soundcloud.com/doodoot/anapanasati
User avatar
rightviewftw
Posts: 2625
Joined: Mon Jan 01, 2018 8:50 pm

Re: Who put's down the burden ?

Post by rightviewftw »

DooDoot wrote: Thu Jan 31, 2019 5:37 am
Let me explain a couple things. On Dhammawheel.com i have to tolerate you but it does not make you my peer or interlocutor, i only engage you occasionally because you are provoking me. I have no actual interest in discussion of your misunderstandings beyond the occasional refutation of your views.

You are free to keep mentioning my name in your posts but when you do so you are not actually discussing the Dhamma with me, what actually happens is that i am probably discussing things with other people and you are not a participant in that discourse as far a participant party is concerned.

Therefore you probably don't find my answers to be adequate and i have to make posts like this.
'Bhikkhus, possessing three qualities, a bhikkhu is practicing the unmistaken way and has laid the groundwork for the destruction of the taints. What three? Here, a bhikkhu guards the doors of the sense faculties, observes moderation in eating, and is intent on wakefulness. He should develop perception of unattractiveness so as to abandon lust... good will so as to abandon ill will... mindfulness of in-&-out breathing so as to cut off distractive thinking... the perception of inconstancy so as to uproot the conceit, 'I am.
User avatar
DooDoot
Posts: 8616
Joined: Tue Aug 08, 2017 11:06 pm

Re: Who put's down the burden ?

Post by DooDoot »

rightviewftw wrote: Thu Jan 31, 2019 6:22 amLet me explain a couple things. On Dhammawheel.com i have to tolerate you but it does not make you my peer or interlocutor, i only engage you occasionally because you are provoking me. I have no actual interest in discussion of your misunderstandings beyond the occasional refutation of your views.
Sounds like "the burden" has not been "put down"; the burden carried as "the person". At least the above posting appears "on-topic" & is a beneficial contribution to the discussion.

:anjali:
There is always an official executioner. If you try to take his place, It is like trying to be a master carpenter and cutting wood. If you try to cut wood like a master carpenter, you will only hurt your hand.

https://soundcloud.com/doodoot/paticcasamuppada
https://soundcloud.com/doodoot/anapanasati
User avatar
DooDoot
Posts: 8616
Joined: Tue Aug 08, 2017 11:06 pm

Re: Who put's down the burden ?

Post by DooDoot »

rightviewftw wrote: Thu Jan 31, 2019 6:54 am....
https://soundcloud.com/dfc-dji
The five aggregates are indeed burdens,
“Bhārā have pañcakkhandhā,

and the person is the bearer of the burden.
bhārahāro ca puggalo;
Full version



:smile:
Last edited by DooDoot on Thu Jan 31, 2019 7:21 am, edited 1 time in total.
There is always an official executioner. If you try to take his place, It is like trying to be a master carpenter and cutting wood. If you try to cut wood like a master carpenter, you will only hurt your hand.

https://soundcloud.com/doodoot/paticcasamuppada
https://soundcloud.com/doodoot/anapanasati
budo
Posts: 1752
Joined: Thu Nov 11, 2010 12:16 am

Re: Who put's down the burden ?

Post by budo »

A simple metaphor is that it takes two to tango, both subject and object. Contact is when subject and object meet. By not having sankhara, there is no more subject, thus no contact either.

Contact is the spark, and if there is ignorance mixed with it then you have craving leading to becoming. If there is no ignorance, then there will be contact until the subject dies and there is no rebirth.
User avatar
DooDoot
Posts: 8616
Joined: Tue Aug 08, 2017 11:06 pm

Re: Who put's down the burden ?

Post by DooDoot »

budo wrote: Thu Jan 31, 2019 7:11 am A simple metaphor is that it takes two to tango, both subject and object. Contact is when subject and object meet. By not having sankhara, there is no more subject, thus no contact either.
Interesting ideas but I have not read this in the suttas. Where exactly do the suttas refer to 'subject' & 'object'? Thanks
budo wrote: Thu Jan 31, 2019 7:11 amContact is the spark, and if there is ignorance mixed with it then you have craving leading to becoming. If there is no ignorance, then there will be contact until the subject dies and there is no rebirth.
This seems to contradict the 1st idea; that says no subject, no object, no contact. Also, the suttas seem to say 'birth' is the condition for 'death' rather than 'death' is the condition for no birth.
There is always an official executioner. If you try to take his place, It is like trying to be a master carpenter and cutting wood. If you try to cut wood like a master carpenter, you will only hurt your hand.

https://soundcloud.com/doodoot/paticcasamuppada
https://soundcloud.com/doodoot/anapanasati
User avatar
rightviewftw
Posts: 2625
Joined: Mon Jan 01, 2018 8:50 pm

Re: Who put's down the burden ?

Post by rightviewftw »

retrofuturist wrote: Thu Jan 31, 2019 5:17 am Greetings Rightviewftw,
rightviewftw wrote: Thu Jan 31, 2019 5:10 am Have you heard of dependent origination of phenomena?
Yes, and it is through that process that I would contend that salayatana itself is an ignorant conception of an "eye in the world", but I shan't pursue that any further here, since it's a view probably at odds with the classical Theravāda position.

:focus:

Metta,
Paul. :)
btw it was a good observation of the mistake i made and i am quite interested in talking to you about your understanding which may or may not be at odds with mine, in a civilized manner, preferably thru PM.
'Bhikkhus, possessing three qualities, a bhikkhu is practicing the unmistaken way and has laid the groundwork for the destruction of the taints. What three? Here, a bhikkhu guards the doors of the sense faculties, observes moderation in eating, and is intent on wakefulness. He should develop perception of unattractiveness so as to abandon lust... good will so as to abandon ill will... mindfulness of in-&-out breathing so as to cut off distractive thinking... the perception of inconstancy so as to uproot the conceit, 'I am.
Post Reply