SN 12.31: Why is the term "nutriment" used ???

Each week we studied and discussed a different sutta or Dhamma text
User avatar
DooDoot
Posts: 5082
Joined: Tue Aug 08, 2017 11:06 pm

SN 12.31: Why is the term "nutriment" used ???

Post by DooDoot » Fri Feb 08, 2019 11:43 am

Dear forum

I originally intended to start this topic on SN 12.31 because i couldn't understand the subject matter of SN 12.31 (plus I am too sight impaired to comprehensively read Bhikkhu Bodhi's convoluted footnotes in small print). But I think I now understand the subject matter of the sutta so my original question I do not need to ask. I think the subject matter of SN 12.31 is the question:
"Those who have comprehended the Dhamma; what is their mode of conduct?".
The answer to the question; to paraphrase; appears to be:
"Those who have comprehended the Dhamma, their mode of conduct is to examine how things come to be and then practise for disechantment & non-clinging towards what has come to be (bhūtamidanti)".
However, since I already copy & pasted the sutta quotes below, I thought to turn this topic into a sutta study (before I go to bed).

So my questions for general discussion are:

1. Why is the term "bhūtamidanti" ("bhuta + idam") used? What to these terms mean?

2. Why did the Buddha use the term "nutriment" ("āhāra") to describe origination of what has come to be?

3. Why didn't the Buddha use the word "paccaya" ("condition") such as found in Dependent Origination?

:shrug:

The sutta material is below:

Sn 5.2 contains the following question & answer:
Q: Those who have discerned the Teaching, and the many in training here,
when I ask the prudent one, please tell me their conduct, dear Sir.

A: He should not be greedy for sense pleasures, or be disturbed in mind.
Skilful in all things, the monk should wander mindfully.

https://suttacentral.net/snp5.2/en/anandajoti
This question is the subject of SN 12.31, as follows:
On one occasion the Blessed One was dwelling at Savatthī.… There the Blessed One addressed the Venerable Sāriputta thus: “Sāriputta, in ‘The Questions of Ajita’ of the Parayana it is said:

‘Those who have comprehended the Dhamma,
And the manifold trainees here:
Asked about their way of conduct,
Being discreet, tell me, dear sir.’

How should the meaning of this, stated in brief, be understood in detail?

When this was said, the Venerable Sāriputta was silent. A second time and a third time the Blessed One addressed the Venerable Sāriputta thus: “Sāriputta, in ‘The Questions of Ajita’ in the Parayana it is said … How should the meaning of this, stated in brief, be understood in detail?” A second time and a third time the Venerable Sāriputta was silent.

Sāriputta, do you see: ‘This has come to be (bhūtamidanti)’? Sāriputta, do you see: ‘This has come to be’?

Venerable sir, one sees as it really is with correct wisdom: ‘This has come to be (bhūtamidanti).’ Having seen as it really is with correct wisdom: ‘This has come to be,’ one is practising for the purpose of revulsion towards what has come to be, for its fading away and cessation. One sees as it really is with correct wisdom: ‘Its origination occurs with that as nutriment (tadāhārasambhavanti).’ Having seen as it really is with correct wisdom: ‘Its origination occurs with that as nutriment, ’ one is practising for the purpose of revulsion towards its origination through nutriment, for its fading away and cessation. One sees as it really is with correct wisdom: ‘With the cessation of that nutriment, what has come to be is subject to cessation.’ Having seen as it really is with correct wisdom: ‘With the cessation of that nutriment, what has come to be is subject to cessation, ’ one is practising for the purpose of revulsion towards what is subject to cessation, for its fading away and cessation. It is in such a way that one is a trainee.

And how, venerable sir, has one comprehended the Dhamma? Venerable sir, one sees as it really is with correct wisdom: ‘This has come to be.’ Having seen as it really is with correct wisdom: ‘This has come to be,’ through revulsion towards what has come to be, through its fading away and cessation, one is liberated by nonclinging. One sees as it really is with correct wisdom: ‘Its origination occurs with that as nutriment.’ Having seen as it really is with correct wisdom: ‘Its origination occurs with that as nutriment,’ through revulsion towards its origination through nutriment, through its fading away and cessation, one is liberated by nonclinging. One sees as it really is with correct wisdom: ‘With the cessation of that nutriment, what has come to be is subject to cessation.’ Having seen as it really is with correct wisdom: ‘With the cessation of that nutriment, what has come to be is subject to cessation,’ through revulsion towards what is subject to cessation, through its fading away and cessation, one is liberated by nonclinging. It is in such a way that one has comprehended the Dhamma.

Thus, venerable sir, when it is said in ‘The Questions of Ajita’ of the Parayana:

‘Those who have comprehended the Dhamma,
And the manifold trainees here:
Asked about their way of conduct,
Being discreet, tell me, dear sir.’—

it is in such a way that I understand in detail the meaning of this that was stated in brief.

Good, good, Sāriputta!… the Buddha repeats here the entire statement of the Venerable Sāriputta … it is in such a way that the meaning of this, stated in brief, should be understood in detail.

https://suttacentral.net/sn12.31/en/bodhi
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

ToVincent
Posts: 573
Joined: Tue Aug 30, 2016 6:02 pm
Contact:

Re: SN 12.31: Why is the term "nutriment" used ???

Post by ToVincent » Fri Feb 08, 2019 3:16 pm

Let's take the parallel, namely the Bhūtamidaṃsūtra SF 173:

tadāhārasaṃbhavaḥ | tadāhārasaṃbhavasya bhikṣur nirvide virāgāya nirodhāya pratipanno bhavati |
तदाहारसम्भवः तदाहारसम्भवस्य भिक्षुः निर्विदे विरागाय निरोधाय प्रतिपन्नः भवति

tadāhāra = tat āhāra

आहार āhāra [ā-hāra] - fr. √ हृ hṛ
- fetching , bringing near (KātyŚr.)
- bringing near , procuring, being about to fetch , going to fetch (MBh.)
OR
- food ( e.g. ā-hāraṃ √ kṛ , to take food , eat MBh.)

:::::::::::::::::::::::::
√ हृ hṛ
- fetch , bring RV.
- to take to one's self , appropriate, come into possession of ŚBr. GṛŚrS.
- to be taken or seized AV.
- to wish to take to one's self or appropriate , covet , desire , long for AV.

Note:
Viharati = fetching distinctively.
वि vi
meaning "in (two) parts" ; and opp. to [sam]
- apart , asunder (RV. )
&
√ हृ hṛ

:::::::::::::::::::::::::

Chronologically, "fetching", "bringing near", and wishing (desiring) to take to one's self or appropriate, might be prefered lexically to the most probable later term "food" (nutriment). Although the latter term applies.

Āhāra is not just nutriment (food); it is the underlying wish (desire) to take to one's self or appropriate.

______

One sees with right discernment that 'it has come into being from this nutriment' (wish to appropriate).
SN 12.31
_______

BHŪTA (What have become) and BHAVA (Becoming - Existence)
https://justpaste.it/tvvi.
.
Some working for the Mara's world; some for the Brahma's world; some for the Unborn.
.
In this world with its ..., māras, ... in this population with its ascetics.... (AN 5.30).
------
We are all possessed - more or less.
------
And what, bhikkhu, is inward rottenness? Here someone is immoral, one of evil character, of impure and suspect behaviour, secretive in his acts, no ascetic though claiming to be one, not a celibate though claiming to be one, inwardly rotten, corrupt, depraved. This is called inward rottenness.”
SN 35.241
------
https://justpaste.it/j5o4

Srilankaputra
Posts: 533
Joined: Tue Nov 06, 2018 3:56 am
Location: Sri Lanka

Re: SN 12.31: Why is the term "nutriment" used ???

Post by Srilankaputra » Fri Feb 08, 2019 4:49 pm

ToVincent wrote:
Fri Feb 08, 2019 3:16 pm
Āhāra is not just nutriment (food); it is the underlying wish (desire) to take to one's self or appropriate.
Thank you for taking this.
"Now, these four nutriments have what as their cause, what as their origination, through what are they born, through what are they brought into being? These four nutriments have craving as their cause, craving as their origination, are born from craving, are brought into being from craving.

https://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitak ... .than.html
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: 5082
Joined: Tue Aug 08, 2017 11:06 pm

Re: SN 12.31: Why is the term "nutriment" used ???

Post by DooDoot » Sat Feb 09, 2019 1:42 am

ToVincent wrote:
Fri Feb 08, 2019 3:16 pm
Āhāra is not just nutriment (food); it is the underlying wish (desire) to take to one's self or appropriate.
I am not sure the Pali supports the above. For example, in SN 12.63, it appears nutriment continues to be consumed but without desire & without appropriation; as follows:
Now what do you think, monks: Would that couple eat that food playfully or for intoxication, or for putting on bulk, or for beautification?"

"No, lord."

"Wouldn't they eat that food simply for the sake of making it through that desert?"

"Yes, lord."

"In the same way, I tell you, is the nutriment of physical food to be regarded.
Also, SN 47.42 appears to say food is the origin of kayanupassana:
Mendicants, I will teach you the origin and the ending of the four kinds of mindfulness meditation.
“Catunnaṃ, bhikkhave, satipaṭṭhānānaṃ samudayañca atthaṅgamañca desessāmi.

Listen …
Taṃ suṇātha.

And what is the origin of the body?
Ko ca, bhikkhave, kāyassa samudayo?

The body originates from food.
Āhārasamudayā kāyassa samudayo;

https://suttacentral.net/sn47.42/en/sujato
Therefore, the impression is the term "ahara" ("nutriment") is not always unwholesome & not always connected to craving. In fact, it appears AN 10.61 uses the term "nutriment" in relation to wholesome dhammas, as follows:
I say, bhikkhus, that (1) true knowledge and liberation have a nutriment; they are not without nutriment. And what is the nutriment for true knowledge and liberation? It should be said: (2) the seven factors of enlightenment. The seven factors of enlightenment, too, I say, have a nutriment; they are not without nutriment. And what is the nutriment for the seven factors of enlightenment? It should be said: (3) the four establishments of mindfulness. The four establishments of mindfulness, too, I say, have a nutriment; they are not without nutriment. And what is the nutriment for the four establishments of mindfulness? It should be said: (4) the three kinds of good conduct. The three kinds of good conduct, too, I say, have a nutriment; they are not without nutriment. And what is the nutriment for the three kinds of good conduct? It should be said: (5) restraint of the sense faculties. Restraint of the sense faculties, too, I say, has a nutriment; it is not without nutriment. And what is the nutriment for restraint of the sense faculties? It should be said: (6) mindfulness and clear comprehension. Mindfulness and clear comprehension, too, I say, have a nutriment; they are not without nutriment. And what is the nutriment for mindfulness and clear comprehension? It should be said: (7) careful attention. Careful attention, too, I say, has a nutriment; it is not without nutriment. And what is the nutriment for careful attention? It should be said: (8) faith. Faith, too, I say, has a nutriment; it is not without nutriment. And what is the nutriment for faith? It should be said: (9) hearing the good Dhamma. Hearing the good Dhamma, too, I say, has a nutriment; it is not without nutriment. And what is the nutriment for hearing the good Dhamma? It should be said: (10) associating with good persons.
:candle:
ToVincent wrote:
Fri Feb 08, 2019 3:16 pm
One sees with right discernment that 'it has come into being from this nutriment' (wish to appropriate). SN 12.31
The above verse is also found in MN 38; after the mutual conditionality of the consciousness & the sense bases are discussed.
ToVincent wrote:
Fri Feb 08, 2019 3:16 pm
BHŪTA (What have become) and BHAVA (Becoming - Existence)
I doubt "bhuta" ("comes to be") is synonymous with "bhava" ("becoming"). For example, in MN 38, where the mutual conditionality of the consciousness & the sense bases is discussed; merely the operation of consciousness & sense bases does not amount to "bhava" ("becoming"). The suttas include "bhava" ("becoming") as one of the asava or defilements (MN 9). The suttas also appear to say "becoming" ("bhava") is related to "self-identification" (MN 44). I think a tree can "bhuta" ("come to be") but I doubt a tree can have "becoming" ("bhava").
Srilankaputra wrote:
Fri Feb 08, 2019 4:49 pm
ToVincent wrote:
Fri Feb 08, 2019 3:16 pm
Āhāra is not just nutriment (food); it is the underlying wish (desire) to take to one's self or appropriate.
Thank you for taking this.
"Now, these four nutriments have what as their cause, what as their origination, through what are they born, through what are they brought into being? These four nutriments have craving as their cause, craving as their origination, are born from craving, are brought into being from craving.

https://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitak ... .than.html
While I do not claim to be correct, I suggest the above quote has been taken out of context. The context is below, namely, "beings (sattanam) who have come to be (bhuta)". Keep in mind SN 23.2 defines "a being" ("satta") as craving; therefore, for "a being" ("satta") to "come to be" ("bhuta") it appears "tanha-upadana-bhava" ("becoming") must occur.
Monks, there are these four nutriments for the maintenance of beings who have come into being or for the support of those in search of a place to be born. Which four? Physical food, gross or refined; contact as the second, intellectual intention the third and consciousness the fourth.

Now, these four nutriments [for the maintenance of beings who have come into being] have what as their cause, what as their origination, through what are they born, through what are they brought into being? These four nutriments have craving as their cause, craving as their origination, are born from craving, are brought into being from craving.
To me, the above does not say craving is the cause of the nutriments. For me, the above says craving is only the cause of those nutriments are the foundation for the becoming ("bhava") of "a being" ("satta"). But when there is no bhava, such as a Buddha whose mind is without the asava of bhava, the nutriments do not originate via craving.
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

Srilankaputra
Posts: 533
Joined: Tue Nov 06, 2018 3:56 am
Location: Sri Lanka

Re: SN 12.31: Why is the term "nutriment" used ???

Post by Srilankaputra » Sat Feb 09, 2019 5:01 am

DooDoot wrote:
Sat Feb 09, 2019 1:42 am

To me, the above does not say craving is the cause of the nutriments. For me, the above says craving is only the cause of those nutriments are the foundation for the becoming ("bhava") of "a being" ("satta"). But when there is no bhava, such as a Buddha whose mind is without the asava of bhava, the nutriments do not originate via craving.
Hi Dd,

I don't think the Sutta is saying that craving produces the four nutriments. Craving is how the four nutriments comes in to play in keeping the vatta revolving. The following Sutta makes it clear I think.
At Savatthī. “Bhikkhus, there are these four kinds of nutriment for the maintenance of beings that have already come to be and for the assistance of those about to come to be. What four? The nutriment edible food, gross or subtle; second, contact; third, mental volition; fourth, consciousness. These are the four kinds of nutriment for the maintenance of beings that have already come to be and for the assistance of those about to come to be.

“If, bhikkhus, there is lust for the nutriment edible food, if there is delight, if there is craving, consciousness becomes established there and comes to growth. Wherever consciousness becomes established and comes to growth, there is a descent of name-and-form. Where there is a descent of name-and-form, there is the growth of volitional formations. Where there is the growth of volitional formations, there is the production of future renewed existence. Where there is the production of future renewed existence, there is future birth, aging, and death. Where there is future birth, aging, and death, I say that is accompanied by sorrow, anguish, and despair.

“If, bhikkhus, there is lust for the nutriment contact, or for the nutriment mental volition, or for the nutriment consciousness, if there is delight, if there is craving, consciousness becomes established there and comes to growth. Wherever consciousness becomes established and comes to growth … I say that is accompanied by sorrow, anguish, and despair.

“Suppose, bhikkhus, an artist or a painter, using dye or lac or turmeric or indigo or crimson, would create the figure of a man or a woman complete in all its features on a well-polished plank or wall or canvas. So too, if there is lust for the nutriment edible food, or for the nutriment contact, or for the nutriment mental volition, or for the nutriment consciousness, if there is delight, if there is craving, consciousness becomes established there and comes to growth. Wherever consciousness becomes established and comes to growth … I say that is accompanied by sorrow, anguish, and despair.

“If, bhikkhus, there is no lust for the nutriment edible food, or for the nutriment contact, or for the nutriment mental volition, or for the nutriment consciousness, if there is no delight, if there is no craving, consciousness does not become established there and come to growth. Where consciousness does not become established and come to growth, there is no descent of name-and-form. Where there is no descent of name-and-form, there is no growth of volitional formations. Where there is no growth of volitional formations, there is no production of future renewed existence. Where there is no production of future renewed existence, there is no future birth, aging, and death. Where there is no future birth, aging, and death, I say that is without sorrow, anguish, and despair.

“Suppose, bhikkhus, there was a house or a hall with a peaked roof, with windows on the northern, southern, and eastern sides. When the sun rises and a beam of light enters through a window, where would it become established?”

“On the western wall, venerable sir.”

“If there were no western wall, where would it become established?”

“On the earth, venerable sir.”

“If there were no earth, where would it become established?”

“On the water, venerable sir.”

“If there were no water, where would it become established?”

“It would not become established anywhere, venerable sir.”

“So too, bhikkhus, if there is no lust for the nutriment edible food … for the nutriment contact … for the nutriment mental volition … for the nutriment consciousness … consciousness does not become established there and come to growth. Where consciousness does not become established and come to growth … … I say that is without sorrow, anguish, and despair
.”

https://suttacentral.net/sn12.64/en/bodhi
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
mikenz66
Posts: 16751
Joined: Sat Jan 10, 2009 7:37 am
Location: Aotearoa, New Zealand

Re: SN 12.31: Why is the term "nutriment" used ???

Post by mikenz66 » Sat Feb 09, 2019 9:36 am

Here is Bhikkhu Bodhi's footnotes on the passage:

“Venerable sir, one sees as it really is with correct wisdom: ‘This has come to be.’ Having seen as it really is with correct wisdom: ‘This has come to be,’ one is practising for the purpose of revulsion towards what has come to be, for its fading away and cessation. [90] One sees as it really is with correct wisdom: ‘Its origination occurs with that as nutriment.’ [91] Having seen as it really is with correct wisdom: ‘Its origination occurs with that as nutriment, ’ one is practising for the purpose of revulsion towards its origination through nutriment, for its fading away and cessation. One sees as it really is with correct wisdom: ‘With the cessation of that nutriment, what has come to be is subject to cessation.’ Having seen as it really is with correct wisdom: ‘With the cessation of that nutriment, what has come to be is subject to cessation, ’ one is practising for the purpose of revulsion towards what is subject to cessation, for its fading away and cessation. It is in such a way that one is a trainee.

[90] Spk: This has come to be (bhūtam idaṃ): this is said of the five aggregates. Thus the Teacher gave the elder the method, implying, “Answer my question by way of the five aggregates.” Then, just as the great ocean appears as one open expanse to a man standing on the shore, so as soon as he was given the method the answer to the question appeared to the elder with a hundred and a thousand methods. With correct wisdom (sammā paññāya): one sees it with path-wisdom together with insight. One is practising: from the stage of virtue as far as the path of arahantship one is said to be practising for the purpose of revulsion, etc. This section shows the practice of the trainee.

[91] Tadāhārasambhavaṃ. On nutriment see 12:11, 12, and n. 18 above. No doubt it is the dependence of the five aggregates on nutriment that accounts for the inclusion of this sutta in the Nidānasaṃyutta. A similar treatment of nutriment, in catechism form, is at MN I 260,7-32.
Spk resolves tadāhārasambhavaṃ as taṃ āhārasambhavaṃ, apparently taking tad to represent the five aggregates. I see the whole expression as qualifying an implicit subject (“its”) and take tad (“that”) as a specification of āhāra. Such an interpretation seems required by the parallel statement on cessation. See too the use of the expression tadāhāra at SN II 85,6, 86,12, 87,6, etc., which supports this interpretation.

Here is note [18]
18 Spk: The nutriments are conditions (paccayā), for conditions are called nutriments (āhārā) because they nourish (or bring forth, āharanti) their own effects. Although there are other conditions for beings, these four alone are called nutriments because they serve as special conditions for the personal life-continuity (ajjhattikasantatiyā visesapaccayattā). For edible food (kabaliṅkāra āhāra) is a special condition for the physical body of those beings who subsist on edible food. In the mental body, contact is the special condition for feeling, mental volition for consciousness, and consciousness for name-and-form. As to what they bring forth (or nourish): Edible food, as soon as it is placed in the mouth, brings forth the groups of form with nutritive essence as the eighth (ojaṭṭhamakarūpāni; an Abhidhamma term for the simplest cluster of material phenomena); the nutriment contact brings forth the three kinds of feeling; the nutriment mental volition brings forth the three kinds of existence; and the nutriment consciousness brings forth name-and-form on the occasion of rebirth.

In SN, nutriment is further discussed at 12:12, 31, 63, and 64. For general remarks
on the four nutriments, see too Vism 341,7-18 (Ppn 11:1-3). Nyanaponika Thera, The Four Nutriments of Life, offers a collection of relevant suttas with commentaries. Āhāra is also used in a broader sense of “special condition,” without reference to the four nutriments, at 46:51 and 55:31.

ToVincent
Posts: 573
Joined: Tue Aug 30, 2016 6:02 pm
Contact:

Re: SN 12.31: Why is the term "nutriment" used ???

Post by ToVincent » Sat Feb 09, 2019 1:15 pm

DooDoot wrote:
Sat Feb 09, 2019 1:42 am
ToVincent wrote:
Fri Feb 08, 2019 3:16 pm
Āhāra is not just nutriment (food); it is the underlying wish (desire) to take to one's self or appropriate.
I am not sure the Pali supports the above. For example, in SN 12.63, it appears nutriment continues to be consumed but without desire & without appropriation; as follows:
I suppose the underlying wish of the couple shifted from eating food for amusement or for enjoyment ..., to the underlying wish to cross the desert.

The meaning behind that simile, seems that one should prefer using nutriments the correct way.
Even if nutriments (underlying wish to appropriate), are not really suitable per se.
The old Buddhist conundrum of still having to use something that we should get rid of (nutriment, atta, etc. - the "raft" epitome).

As usual, you are incorrectly splitting hair to have a say.

______

As far as nutriments as "food" (comestible) is concerned, I have said above that it can also be used.
_______
DooDoot wrote:
Sat Feb 09, 2019 1:42 am
I doubt "bhuta" ("comes to be") is synonymous with "bhava" ("becoming").
I don't see your point.

I just linked to a page (whose title is BHŪTA (What have become) and BHAVA (Becoming - Existence).
A page, (if you have read it,) that adresses generally the verb bhavati and its root bhū.
Bhūta and bhava being two derived words, that are frequently used in the suttas.

Again that need to argue, for the sake of arguing, I suppose. With a pretty feeble casuistry, I'll say:
DooDoot wrote:
I think a tree can "bhuta" ("come to be") but I doubt a tree can have "becoming" ("bhava").

That is a profound ontological question indeed.
I suppose entire thick books could be written on the subject.

?!?!?
.
.
Some working for the Mara's world; some for the Brahma's world; some for the Unborn.
.
In this world with its ..., māras, ... in this population with its ascetics.... (AN 5.30).
------
We are all possessed - more or less.
------
And what, bhikkhu, is inward rottenness? Here someone is immoral, one of evil character, of impure and suspect behaviour, secretive in his acts, no ascetic though claiming to be one, not a celibate though claiming to be one, inwardly rotten, corrupt, depraved. This is called inward rottenness.”
SN 35.241
------
https://justpaste.it/j5o4

User avatar
DooDoot
Posts: 5082
Joined: Tue Aug 08, 2017 11:06 pm

Re: SN 12.31: Why is the term "nutriment" used ???

Post by DooDoot » Sat Feb 09, 2019 10:55 pm

Srilankaputra wrote:
Sat Feb 09, 2019 5:01 am
If, bhikkhus, there is lust for the nutriment edible food, if there is delight, if there is craving, consciousness becomes established there and comes to growth....

If, bhikkhus, there is lust for the nutriment contact, or for the nutriment mental volition, or for the nutriment consciousness, if there is delight, if there is craving, consciousness becomes established there and comes to growth.

If, bhikkhus, there is no lust for the nutriment edible food, or for the nutriment contact, or for the nutriment mental volition, or for the nutriment consciousness, if there is no delight, if there is no craving, consciousness does not become established there and come to growth....
Thank you. The above sutta appears to explain 'nutriment' very well (as I explained); showing it is craving that is the problem rather than nutriment. However, since the rest of the sutta that includes Dependent Origination is not universally agreed upon, I will add SN 22.53, to make the sutta clear; to show consciousness continues to exist after craving is destroyed; although, as the sutta says, consciousness is "not established" anyway (but, instead, remains, non-attached).
If a monk abandons passion for the property of consciousness, then owing to the abandonment of passion, the support is cut off, and there is no landing of consciousness. Consciousness, thus not having landed, not increasing, not concocting, is released. Owing to its release, it is steady. Owing to its steadiness, it is contented. Owing to its contentment, it is not agitated. Not agitated, he (the monk) is totally unbound right within.

https://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitak ... .than.html
:alien:
ToVincent wrote:
Sat Feb 09, 2019 1:15 pm
As usual, you are incorrectly splitting hair to have a say
It think the sutta quotes made (particularly AN 10.61) showed your views were incorrect.
ToVincent wrote:
Sat Feb 09, 2019 1:15 pm
That is a profound ontological question indeed.
"Ontological" is unrelated to Buddhism. The Buddha never used the word "ontological", "non-ontological" or anything similar to it. I think interpreting sutta merely from definitions of words in non-Buddhist dictionaries & from the viewpoint of Western philosophy is not really related to sutta study. I think the sutta quotes made (particularly AN 10.61) showed your underlying views on the subject of 'nutriment' were fundamentally incorrect & non-Buddhist in nature.

:candle:
Last edited by DooDoot on Sat Feb 09, 2019 11:29 pm, edited 3 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
DooDoot
Posts: 5082
Joined: Tue Aug 08, 2017 11:06 pm

Re: SN 12.31: Why is the term "nutriment" used ???

Post by DooDoot » Sat Feb 09, 2019 11:09 pm

DooDoot wrote:
Fri Feb 08, 2019 11:43 am
The sutta material is below: SN 12.31

On one occasion the Blessed One was dwelling at Savatthī.… There the Blessed One addressed the Venerable Sāriputta thus: “Sāriputta, in ‘The Questions of Ajita’ of the Parayana it is said:

Those who have comprehended the Dhamma,
And the manifold trainees here:
Asked about their way of conduct,
Being discreet, tell me, dear sir.’

Venerable sir, one sees as it really is with correct wisdom: ‘This has come to be (bhūtamidanti).’ Having seen as it really is with correct wisdom: ‘This has come to be,’ one is practising for the purpose of revulsion towards what has come to be, for its fading away and cessation. One sees as it really is with correct wisdom: ‘Its origination occurs with that as nutriment (tadāhārasambhavanti).’ Having seen as it really is with correct wisdom: ‘Its origination occurs with that as nutriment, ’ one is practising for the purpose of revulsion towards its origination through nutriment, for its fading away and cessation. One sees as it really is with correct wisdom: ‘With the cessation of that nutriment, what has come to be is subject to cessation.’ Having seen as it really is with correct wisdom: ‘With the cessation of that nutriment, what has come to be is subject to cessation, ’ one is practising for the purpose of revulsion towards what is subject to cessation, for its fading away and cessation.
So, the impression to me is Srilankaputra & myself have come to some agreement about the basics on this complex subject of what the term "nutriment" means. However, this has not answered the questions of this topic, which are:

1. Why is the term "bhūtamidanti" ("bhuta + idam") used? What to these terms mean?

2. Why did the Buddha use the term "nutriment" ("āhāra") in relation to the understanding of origination & cessation of what has come to be to describe those who have comprehended the Dhamma?

3. Why didn't the Buddha use the word "paccaya" ("condition") such as found in Dependent Origination?

:shrug:

For example, in the famous words of the Arahant Assaji to Upatissa (Sariputta), the word "hetu" ("cause") was used to describe the fundamental understanding of Buddhism:
Ye dhamma hetuppabhava tesam hetum tathagato aha, tesañca yo nirodho evamvadi mahasamano

"Of all those things that from a cause arise,
Tathagata the cause thereof has told;
And how they cease to be, that too he tells,
This is the doctrine of the Great Recluse."

https://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/aut ... html#fnt-2
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

thomaslaw
Posts: 221
Joined: Fri Apr 19, 2013 12:55 am
Location: Australia

Re: SN 12.31: Why is the term "nutriment" used ???

Post by thomaslaw » Sun Feb 10, 2019 12:56 am

DooDoot wrote:
Fri Feb 08, 2019 11:43 am
Dear forum

I originally intended to start this topic on SN 12.31 because i couldn't understand the subject matter of SN 12.31 (plus I am too sight impaired to comprehensively read Bhikkhu Bodhi's convoluted footnotes in small print). But I think I now understand the subject matter of the sutta so my original question I do not need to ask. I think the subject matter of SN 12.31 is the question:
"Those who have comprehended the Dhamma; what is their mode of conduct?".
The answer to the question; to paraphrase; appears to be:
"Those who have comprehended the Dhamma, their mode of conduct is to examine how things come to be and then practise for disechantment & non-clinging towards what has come to be (bhūtamidanti)".
However, since I already copy & pasted the sutta quotes below, I thought to turn this topic into a sutta study (before I go to bed).

So my questions for general discussion are:

1. Why is the term "bhūtamidanti" ("bhuta + idam") used? What to these terms mean?

2. Why did the Buddha use the term "nutriment" ("āhāra") to describe origination of what has come to be?

3. Why didn't the Buddha use the word "paccaya" ("condition") such as found in Dependent Origination?
I think the main reason why the term "ahara" being used is "the maintenance or support of creatures or beings seeking to become", according to SN 12.11:

Four aharas are for the maintenance/support of creatures/beings seeking to become: 1. Material ahara (kabalimkara-ahara), 2. Contact ahara (phassa-ahara), 3. Volition ahara (manosancetana-ahara), and Consciousness ahara (vinnana-ahara).

User avatar
DooDoot
Posts: 5082
Joined: Tue Aug 08, 2017 11:06 pm

Re: SN 12.31: Why is the term "nutriment" used ???

Post by DooDoot » Mon Feb 11, 2019 4:32 am

OK. Before this topic disappears into the ether, I will provide my mere guesses to these questions and will be happy & grateful to be corrected on any plain errors. :smile:
1. Why is the term "bhūtamidanti" ("bhuta + idam") used? What to these terms mean?
My guess is 'bhuta' can refer to any type of 'coming to be', whether it is physical or mental; kammic (e.g., from mental intention) or non-kammic (e.g, the growth of a mushroom).
2. Why did the Buddha use the term "nutriment" ("āhāra") in relation to the understanding of origination & cessation of what has come to be to describe those who have comprehended the Dhamma?
Having posted a collection of suttas (above), my impression is "āhāra" is the broadest word for "related condition"; particularly in view of AN 10.61, where it is said the five hindrance are the "āhāra" of ignorance. Since it would be wrong to say the five hindrances are the preceding cause ("hetu') of ignorance, it seems is "āhāra" is the broadest word for a related condition; where that condition can be "causal" or, otherwise, merely "supportive".

For example, AN 10.61 not only refers to the five aggregates as a "supportive condition" for ignorance; but also refers to many dhammas, including path factors, as "causal conditions" for the arising of the Path. Thus,it seems "ahara" can be used for both "supportive" conditions and "causal" conditions.
3. Why didn't the Buddha use the word "paccaya" ("condition") such as found in Dependent Origination?
Per answer 2 above. In AN 10.61, the word 'cause' ('hetu') would be wrong and the term 'condition' ('pacaya') probably would be too vague. Similarly, in the teaching of the four nutriments, the term is "āhāra" appears to signify what "sustains" or "supports" rather than what "creates" or "causes".

So, I guess "āhāra" is the broadest word for "related condition" to satisfy the following core fundamental principle of Buddhism:
‘When this exists, that is; due to the arising of this, that arises.
‘iti imasmiṃ sati idaṃ hoti, imassuppādā idaṃ uppajjati;

When this doesn’t exist, that is not; due to the cessation of this, that ceases. That is:
imasmiṃ asati idaṃ na hoti, imassa nirodhā idaṃ nirujjhati, yadidaṃ—
Note, the Pali word "idam" is again contained above, similar to SN 12.31, which includes "idam' in "bhūtamidanti" ("bhuta + idam"). Therefore, it appears the "coming to be" ("bhuta") of "this" ("idam") can refer to the coming to be of anything; given "idam" can refer to anything.

For example, in MN 38, after explaining the dependently arisen nature of consciousness, the same teaching as in SN 12.31 is given. While the commentary tradition says "idam" or "this" refers to the five aggregates in MN 38, personally, I think "this" merely refers to consciousness, which was the preceding subject matter. While "idam" or "this" can certainly refer to the five aggregates; it seems seems "idam" can refer to anything. Thus, in the context of MN 38, I think it refers to only the coming to be of consciousness (with the sense bases as the "nutriment" of consciousness).

Regards :smile:
Last edited by DooDoot on Mon Feb 11, 2019 5:22 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
DooDoot
Posts: 5082
Joined: Tue Aug 08, 2017 11:06 pm

Re: SN 12.31: Why is the term "nutriment" used ???

Post by DooDoot » Mon Feb 11, 2019 5:07 am

This sutta study topic is related to the topic: Does consciousness have a nutriment???.
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

ToVincent
Posts: 573
Joined: Tue Aug 30, 2016 6:02 pm
Contact:

Re: SN 12.31: Why is the term "nutriment" used ???

Post by ToVincent » Mon Feb 11, 2019 12:20 pm

DooDoot wrote:
Sat Feb 09, 2019 10:55 pm
ToVincent wrote:
Sat Feb 09, 2019 1:15 pm
As usual, you are incorrectly splitting hair to have a say
It think the sutta quotes made (particularly AN 10.61) showed your views were incorrect.
ToVincent wrote:
Sat Feb 09, 2019 1:15 pm
That is a profound ontological question indeed.
"Ontological" is unrelated to Buddhism. The Buddha never used the word "ontological", "non-ontological" or anything similar to it. I think interpreting sutta merely from definitions of words in non-Buddhist dictionaries & from the viewpoint of Western philosophy is not really related to sutta study. I think the sutta quotes made ( particularly AN 10.61 ) showed your underlying views on the subject of 'nutriment' were fundamentally incorrect & non-Buddhist in nature.
Isn't it time to get serious?
Isn't it time to get off the non-sense merry-go-round?

The first issue, is about the gentle hysteria among the major sects, to softly refuse the use of parallels in the Texts.
Some people don't make even the effort to look at parallels before quoting a sutta or its extracts.
They believe that they are putting their idiosyncratic creed at jeopardy.

A Theravadan will feel like betraying his faith, if he is not using suttas that have no parallel whatsoever.
Instead of seeing in the strict use of parallels, a way to guarantee the veracity of his scriptures, and the non-sectarian stance that Buddha whished for.

Or maybe his intentions are just elsewhere.

Quoting AN 10.61 is useless to me.
If you take its MA 52 parallel for instance, you will see no "nutriment" in that sutra.
https://legacy.suttacentral.net/an10.61

----------

The second issue is about the less gentle hysteria about dictionaries.

Two major dictionnaries are used nowadays by major scholars.

The Pali Text Society's Pali-English Dictionary (a.k.a. PTS), from the Pali Text Society; and the Critical Pāli Dictionary (CPD), that is maintained by the Data Center for the Humanities at the University of Cologne, in cooperation with the Pali Text Society.

PTS rules.
PTS is (unfortunately or not,) the root of all past and present translations.

And however idiosyncratic were the views of Thomas William Rhys Davids at the time, and whatever were his underlying intentions; what is crucial to notice is the following:
The PTS refers most of the time to Vedic or Sanskrit roots - (Rhys Davids had studied Sanskrit, before Pali).

However, it is obvious, when looking at the Monier-Williams's dictionary, that Rhys Davids did not make much difference between post and pre Buddhist meanings from these roots.

It is quite dubious indeed, to find in the PTS Pali dictionary (and the subsequent CPD), words that have only come up commonly, centuries later after Buddha, in the Indian literature.
Just like it would be dubious to find the word "internet" in a 1900 English dictionary.

The use of Pali words that have only their meanings in post-Buddhist Indian literature, is the first mistake.

The second mistake is to deny that Rhys Davids had drawn the meaning of Pali words from the Sanskrit literature he had studied before Pali
And to say that doing the same in a more correct way (viz. drawing the meaning of a Pali word from pre-Buddhist Sanskrit literature only,) is "not-Buddhist", is utterly nonsense.

Casuistry.

The third error would be, not to look at all at Monier-Williams' dictionary, under the false pretext that this is "not-Buddhist".

For instance, in a previous post, in another thread,
viewtopic.php?f=13&t=33593#p501304
I did translate the compounded sentence
Aniccasaññābhāvanānuyogamanuyuttā
by: "connected with the wise examination of what has caused to become the perception of anicca".

On SuttaCentral where you can find Bodhi and Sujato translations, they respectively translated that MN 118 compounded sentence by:
- who abide devoted to the development of the perception of impermanence,
and
- committed to developing the meditation on impermanence.

Both translators skipped the translation of "manu", because there is no translation of manu (मनु manu) as "wise", in any Pali-English-dictionary.
Only in the Monier-Williams'.

It would therefore be ludicrous, and even a sophistry, to deny the use of the latter.


But anyway, how good is this compounded sentence, if it has no parallel ?
.
.
Some working for the Mara's world; some for the Brahma's world; some for the Unborn.
.
In this world with its ..., māras, ... in this population with its ascetics.... (AN 5.30).
------
We are all possessed - more or less.
------
And what, bhikkhu, is inward rottenness? Here someone is immoral, one of evil character, of impure and suspect behaviour, secretive in his acts, no ascetic though claiming to be one, not a celibate though claiming to be one, inwardly rotten, corrupt, depraved. This is called inward rottenness.”
SN 35.241
------
https://justpaste.it/j5o4

User avatar
Volo
Posts: 583
Joined: Sat Jul 28, 2018 9:32 am

Re: SN 12.31: Why is the term "nutriment" used ???

Post by Volo » Mon Feb 11, 2019 2:19 pm

ToVincent wrote:
Mon Feb 11, 2019 12:20 pm
Both translators skipped the translation of "manu", because there is no translation of manu (मनु manu) as "wise", in any Pali-English-dictionary.
Only in the Monier-Williams'.
Can you show any other place in Tipitaka, where "manu" is used? But not as a part of compound or sandhi (because you can resolve them in a strange way, as "anuyogamanuyuttā = anuyoga+manu+yutta", and not traditionally "anuyogam + anuyutta"), but as a separate word.

ToVincent
Posts: 573
Joined: Tue Aug 30, 2016 6:02 pm
Contact:

Re: SN 12.31: Why is the term "nutriment" used ???

Post by ToVincent » Mon Feb 11, 2019 8:37 pm

Volo wrote:
Mon Feb 11, 2019 2:19 pm
ToVincent wrote:
Mon Feb 11, 2019 12:20 pm
Both translators skipped the translation of "manu", because there is no translation of manu (मनु manu) as "wise", in any Pali-English-dictionary.
Only in the Monier-Williams'.
Can you show any other place in Tipitaka, where "manu" is used? But not as a part of compound or sandhi (because you can resolve them in a strange way, as "anuyogamanuyuttā = anuyoga+manu+yutta", and not traditionally "anuyogam + anuyutta"), but as a separate word.
Can you show any other place in Tipitaka , where anuyogaṁ anuyutta is sandhied as anuyogamanuyuttā ?

- Bhāvanānuyogaṃ anuyuttassa (SN 22.101)
- somanassānuyogaṃ anuyuttā (MN139)
- asubhanimittānuyogaṃ anuyuttā (AN 10.72)
- jutappamādaṭṭhānānuyogaṃ anuyuttā, or surāmerayamajjappamādaṭṭhānānuyogaṃ anuyuttā (Mnd 11)
etc.

I see no sandhying there.

________

My post was an answer to the hysteria about (parallels &) Sanskrit dictionaries; to make a point about the two meanings of "āhāra" in the pre and post Indian literature.
Refusing to look at these two meanings in the Monier-Williams dictionary is ludicrous, was I noticing.

I repeat:
"Āhāra is not just nutriment (food); it is also the underlying wish (desire) to take to one's self, or appropriate."
As per definition of आहार āhāra and √ हृ hṛ in the Monier-Williams Sanskrit dictionary.

Now, if DooDoot wants to make it:
"āhāra" is the broadest word for "related condition",
in his own terms; I would like to know where he got that from, "lexicographically" speaking ?
Not to mention the fact that, his somewhat interpretation is based on a sutta whose parallels do not adress the notion of āhāra.

________

You are dragging us into useless red herring, Volo.
:redherring:
.
Some working for the Mara's world; some for the Brahma's world; some for the Unborn.
.
In this world with its ..., māras, ... in this population with its ascetics.... (AN 5.30).
------
We are all possessed - more or less.
------
And what, bhikkhu, is inward rottenness? Here someone is immoral, one of evil character, of impure and suspect behaviour, secretive in his acts, no ascetic though claiming to be one, not a celibate though claiming to be one, inwardly rotten, corrupt, depraved. This is called inward rottenness.”
SN 35.241
------
https://justpaste.it/j5o4

Locked

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 5 guests