Sabbe sankhara dukkha - how to observe this Dhamma?

General discussion of issues related to Theravada Meditation, e.g. meditation postures, developing a regular sitting practice, skillfully relating to difficulties and hindrances, etc.
User avatar
Ben
Posts: 18438
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2008 12:49 am
Location: kanamaluka

Re: Sabbe sankhara dukkha - how to observe this Dhamma?

Post by Ben »

Hi Retro
retrofuturist wrote:In fact, I've also heard that one only truly sees them fully with stream-entry... which, if true, almost seems to lead to a bit of a Catch-22 situation.
I don't believe so. At least for me, its an iterative process. One begins by observing anicca. As one develops one's sensitivity towards the anicca characteristic in phenomena, both dukkha and anatta characteristics becomes increasingly evident, increasing familiarity and knowledge of one support the knowledge of all until culmination as an ariya. And I want to make it clear I am not claiming to be an ariya.
I think this process of gradual realization is inferred also in the nine vipassana nanas.
metta

Ben
“No lists of things to be done. The day providential to itself. The hour. There is no later. This is later. All things of grace and beauty such that one holds them to one's heart have a common provenance in pain. Their birth in grief and ashes.”
- Cormac McCarthy, The Road

Learn this from the waters:
in mountain clefts and chasms,
loud gush the streamlets,
but great rivers flow silently.
- Sutta Nipata 3.725

Compassionate Hands Foundation (Buddhist aid in Myanmar) • Buddhist Global ReliefUNHCR

e: [email protected]..
User avatar
Virgo
Posts: 1546
Joined: Sun Feb 14, 2010 10:52 pm
Location: United States

Re: Sabbe sankhara dukkha - how to observe this Dhamma?

Post by Virgo »

retrofuturist wrote:Greetings acinteyyo,
acinteyyo wrote:truly seeing one means automatically seeing all three characteristics.
I've heard that too. In fact, I've also heard that one only truly sees them fully with stream-entry... which, if true, almost seems to lead to a bit of a Catch-22 situation.

:juggling:

Metta,
Retro. :)
At stream-entry one finally passes through all the final stages of insight, so one will see the anicca, anatta, or dukkha aspect clearer than ever before. This will finally condition the citta to turn away from conditioned dhammas fully and take the unconditioned element as object. There will be maga and phala moments. Then one is aware that three fetters are gone.

Nibbana is very quick for one who attains stream entry. It only lasts 3 moments (one maga and two phala), or two moments (one maga and one phala) for some who have jhana. That is extremely quick. The individual is aware that it happened and that the fetters are now absent forever, never to arise again.

kevin
User avatar
DNS
Site Admin
Posts: 17169
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 4:15 am
Location: Las Vegas, Nevada, Estados Unidos de América
Contact:

Re: Sabbe sankhara dukkha - how to observe this Dhamma?

Post by DNS »

Virgo wrote: At stream-entry one finally passes through all the final stages of insight, so one will see the anicca, anatta, or dukkha aspect clearer than ever before.
Are you referring to the 16 stages of Insight Knowledge ?
User avatar
Virgo
Posts: 1546
Joined: Sun Feb 14, 2010 10:52 pm
Location: United States

Re: Sabbe sankhara dukkha - how to observe this Dhamma?

Post by Virgo »

David N. Snyder wrote:
Virgo wrote: At stream-entry one finally passes through all the final stages of insight, so one will see the anicca, anatta, or dukkha aspect clearer than ever before.
Are you referring to the 16 stages of Insight Knowledge ?
Yes, David. Thank you for providing that link.

Kevin
User avatar
DNS
Site Admin
Posts: 17169
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 4:15 am
Location: Las Vegas, Nevada, Estados Unidos de América
Contact:

Re: Sabbe sankhara dukkha - how to observe this Dhamma?

Post by DNS »

Virgo wrote:'Rocks' are not dukkha. But the components that make up the concept 'rock' are all dukkha. Such as color, hardness, and so on.
Hi Kevin,

Then how does the above fit with:

3. Knowledge of mental and physical processes as impermanent, unsatisfactory, and not-self.

(from the 16 Stages of Insight Knowledge)
User avatar
Virgo
Posts: 1546
Joined: Sun Feb 14, 2010 10:52 pm
Location: United States

Re: Sabbe sankhara dukkha - how to observe this Dhamma?

Post by Virgo »

David N. Snyder wrote:
Virgo wrote:'Rocks' are not dukkha. But the components that make up the concept 'rock' are all dukkha. Such as color, hardness, and so on.
Hi Kevin,

Then how does the above fit with:

3. Knowledge of mental and physical processes as impermanent, unsatisfactory, and not-self.

(from the 16 Stages of Insight Knowledge)
Hi David. I believe I've explained this already. A rock is a concept. Concepts are never the object of satipatthana, only paramattha dhammas are. Any of the eight inseparable rupas that appear, and which we label rock could be an object of insight, such as the color, the hardness, the temperature, and so on. The citta that has a concept as object or a cetasika in the process can be the object of satipatthana as well, but never a concept.

I
User avatar
retrofuturist
Posts: 27839
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 9:52 pm
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Contact:

Re: Sabbe sankhara dukkha - how to observe this Dhamma?

Post by retrofuturist »

Greetings Kim,
Kim O'Hara wrote:Complementing my complement, I just got:
All compounded things are associated with suffering, or, if you prefer, 'All formations are associated with suffering.'
What you have discovered for yourself here is Dhamma - it is truth. It accords with your experience and you know it as such. That is good, and it is a valuable truth to know...
Kim O'Hara wrote:I could get to like that as a translation of 'Sabbe sankhara dukkha'.
... however, it's not the full meaning of "sabbe sankhara dukkha", so whilst you are right to take what you know as truth, do not become complacent about it and allow yourself to rest in that knowledge, without continuing to investigate further.

Metta,
Retro. :)
"Whatever is true, whatever is noble, whatever is right, whatever is pure, whatever is lovely, whatever is admirable—if anything is excellent or praiseworthy—think about such things."
User avatar
DNS
Site Admin
Posts: 17169
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 4:15 am
Location: Las Vegas, Nevada, Estados Unidos de América
Contact:

Re: Sabbe sankhara dukkha - how to observe this Dhamma?

Post by DNS »

My apologies if this has already been quoted:
The meditator, however, does not perceive anything that is permanent and lasting, or free from destruction and disappearance.

Seeing how each object, even while being noticed, comes to destruction and disappearance, the meditator comprehends it as impermanent in the sense of undergoing destruction. He further comprehends it as suffering (painful) in the sense of breaking up after each arising. Having seen how various painful feelings arise in continuous succession — how if one painful feeling ceases, another arises, and when that has ceased, again another arises — having seen that, he comprehends the respective objects as just a conglomeration of suffering. Further, he comprehends the object as consisting of mere impersonal phenomena without a master, in the sense of not arising of (or by) themselves, but arising subject to conditions and then breaking up.

This comprehension of an object noticed, as being impermanent, painful, and without a self (impersonal), through knowing its nature of impermanency, etc., by means of simply noticing, without reflecting and reasoning, is called "knowledge by comprehension through direct experience."

Having thus seen the three characteristics once or several times by direct experience, the meditator, by inference from the direct experience of those objects noticed, comprehends all bodily and mental processes of the past, present, and future, and the whole world, by coming to the conclusion: "They, too, are in the same way impermanent, painful, and without a self." This is called "knowledge of comprehension by inference."

Alluding to this very knowledge, it is said in the Patisambhidamagga: "Whatever there is of materiality, past, present or future, internal or external, coarse or fine, inferior or superior, far or near, all materiality he defines as impermanent. That is one kind of comprehension," and so on.
The Progress of Insight
(Visuddhiñana-katha)
by
The Venerable Mahasi Sayadaw

http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/auth ... html#ch4.3" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
User avatar
tiltbillings
Posts: 23046
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2008 9:25 am

Re: Sabbe sankhara dukkha - how to observe this Dhamma?

Post by tiltbillings »

Virgo wrote:
Hi David. I believe I've explained this already. A rock is a concept. Concepts are never the object of satipatthana, only paramattha dhammas are.
Actually, dhammas are not the object of awareness, either. Dhammas are how we can talk about our experience after the fact, which means that "dhamma" is a conceptual structure used for talking about a type of meditative experience.
>> Do you see a man wise [enlightened/ariya] in his own eyes? There is more hope for a fool than for him.<< -- Proverbs 26:12

This being is bound to samsara, kamma is his means for going beyond. -- SN I, 38.

“Of course it is happening inside your head, Harry, but why on earth should that mean that it is not real?” HPatDH p.723
User avatar
Kim OHara
Posts: 5584
Joined: Wed Dec 09, 2009 5:47 am
Location: North Queensland, Australia

Re: Sabbe sankhara dukkha - how to observe this Dhamma?

Post by Kim OHara »

retrofuturist wrote:Greetings Kim,
Kim O'Hara wrote:Complementing my complement, I just got:
All compounded things are associated with suffering, or, if you prefer, 'All formations are associated with suffering.'
What you have discovered for yourself here is Dhamma - it is truth. It accords with your experience and you know it as such. That is good, and it is a valuable truth to know...
Thank you, Retro. :bow:
retrofuturist wrote: ... however, it's not the full meaning of "sabbe sankhara dukkha", so whilst you are right to take what you know as truth, do not become complacent about it and allow yourself to rest in that knowledge, without continuing to investigate further.
Okay, investigating further (I was going to ask this anyway :smile: ) --
What is the logical relationship between "sankhara" and "dukkha" in "sabbe sankhara dukkha"?
I have opted for "is associated with" rather than "is", but is any more-specific relationship implicit in the verb-less conjunction in the Pali? "Is caused by" or "causes" or "is subject to" or "is created by" or any such connection?
It's a question I should have asked earlier.
:namaste:
Kim
User avatar
retrofuturist
Posts: 27839
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 9:52 pm
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Contact:

Re: Sabbe sankhara dukkha - how to observe this Dhamma?

Post by retrofuturist »

Greetings Kim,
Kim O'Hara wrote:Okay, investigating further (I was going to ask this anyway :smile: ) --
What is the logical relationship between "sankhara" and "dukkha" in "sabbe sankhara dukkha"?
I have opted for "is associated with" rather than "is", but is any more-specific relationship implicit in the verb-less conjunction in the Pali? "Is caused by" or "causes" or "is subject to" or "is created by" or any such connection?
I probably can't answer this question to your satisfaction since I'm not totally au fait with Pali grammar. What I do know, however, is that it doesn't always follow the grammatical structure of English. I remember when I was learning Italian in school, I found it interesting that the noun came before the descriptive word. It would be "chair yellow" rather than "yellow chair", and I've found that Pali can work like this at times. If it is working like Italian in this instance (which I suspect it is) dukkha is a description or quality of sankhara. So just like we don't need to say "chair are yellow" or "chair is yellow" and so on in order to attribute yellowness to it, there doesn't need to be an extra word wedged inbetween sankhara and dukkha in order for it to mean "all formations are suffering". That's probably as far as I can go in answering your question with my limited knowledge.

Metta,
Retro. :)
"Whatever is true, whatever is noble, whatever is right, whatever is pure, whatever is lovely, whatever is admirable—if anything is excellent or praiseworthy—think about such things."
pt1
Posts: 417
Joined: Thu Jan 22, 2009 2:30 am

Re: Sabbe sankhara dukkha - how to observe this Dhamma?

Post by pt1 »

Hi tilt,
tiltbillings wrote:Actually, dhammas are not the object of awareness, either. Dhammas are how we can talk about our experience after the fact, which means that "dhamma" is a conceptual structure used for talking about a type of meditative experience.
As expressed in previous discussions, I find it hard to accept that your interpretation is actually borne out by theravadin texts. I make a case for a different interpretation in this thread.

Would be glad to hear on which particular points you disagree. Thanks.

Best wishes
User avatar
acinteyyo
Posts: 1706
Joined: Mon Jun 01, 2009 9:48 am
Location: Bavaria / Germany

Re: Sabbe sankhara dukkha - how to observe this Dhamma?

Post by acinteyyo »

retrofuturist wrote:Greetings Kim,
Kim O'Hara wrote:Okay, investigating further (I was going to ask this anyway :smile: ) --
What is the logical relationship between "sankhara" and "dukkha" in "sabbe sankhara dukkha"?
I have opted for "is associated with" rather than "is", but is any more-specific relationship implicit in the verb-less conjunction in the Pali? "Is caused by" or "causes" or "is subject to" or "is created by" or any such connection?
I probably can't answer this question to your satisfaction since I'm not totally au fait with Pali grammar. What I do know, however, is that it doesn't always follow the grammatical structure of English. I remember when I was learning Italian in school, I found it interesting that the noun came before the descriptive word. It would be "chair yellow" rather than "yellow chair", and I've found that Pali can work like this at times. If it is working like Italian in this instance (which I suspect it is) dukkha is a description or quality of sankhara. So just like we don't need to say "chair are yellow" or "chair is yellow" and so on in order to attribute yellowness to it, there doesn't need to be an extra word wedged inbetween sankhara and dukkha in order for it to mean "all formations are suffering". That's probably as far as I can go in answering your question with my limited knowledge.
Metta,
Retro. :)
As far as I can tell, I think it's quite similar to what retro said.
It is a predicative construction consisting of two nouns and a verb.
Like "sabbe purise samane honti" meaning "All men are ascetics", but "honti" is not needed to say the same thing.
"sabbe purise samane" is enough also meaning "All men are ascetics". In the same way "sabbe sankhara dukkha (honti)" means "all formations are suffering".
Thag 1.20. Ajita - I do not fear death; nor do I long for life. I’ll lay down this body, aware and mindful.
User avatar
acinteyyo
Posts: 1706
Joined: Mon Jun 01, 2009 9:48 am
Location: Bavaria / Germany

Re: Sabbe sankhara dukkha - how to observe this Dhamma?

Post by acinteyyo »

retrofuturist wrote:Greetings acinteyyo,
acinteyyo wrote:truly seeing one means automatically seeing all three characteristics.
I've heard that too. In fact, I've also heard that one only truly sees them fully with stream-entry... which, if true, almost seems to lead to a bit of a Catch-22 situation.

:juggling:

Metta,
Retro. :)
Hi retro,
it's probably like seeing avijja as avijja. Which reminds me of Ven. Ñanavira Theras Notes on paticcasamuppāda
A man with avijjā, practising reflexion, may identify 'self' with both reflexive and immediate experience, or with reflexive experience alone, or with immediate experience alone. He does not conclude that neither is 'self', and the reason is clear: it is not possible to get outside avijjā by means of reflexion alone; for however much a man may 'step back' from himself to observe himself he cannot help taking avijjā with him. There is just as much avijjā in the self-observer as there is in the self-observed. And this is the very reason why avijjā is so stable in spite of its being sankhatā. Simply by reflexion the puthujjana can never observe avijjā and at the same time recognize it as avijjā; for in reflexion avijjā is the Judge as well as the Accused, and the verdict is always 'Not Guilty'. In order to put an end to avijjā, which is a matter of recognizing avijjā as avijjā, it is necessary to accept on trust from the Buddha a Teaching that contradicts the direct evidence of the puthujjana's reflexion. This is why the Dhamma is patisotagāmī (Majjhima iii,6 <M.i,168>), or 'going against the stream'. The Dhamma gives the puthujjana the outside view of avijjā, which is inherently unobtainable for him by unaided reflexion (in the ariyasāvaka this view has, as it were, 'taken' like a graft, and is perpetually available). Thus it will be seen that avijjā in reflexive experience (actual or potential) is the condition for avijjā in immediate experience. It is possible, also, to take a second step back and reflect upon reflexion; but there is still avijjā in this self-observation of self-observation, and we have a third layer of avijjā protecting the first two. And there is no reason in theory why we should stop here; but however far we go we shall not get beyond avijjā. The hierarchy of avijjā can also be seen from the Suttas in the following way.



Katamā pan'āvuso avijjā....
Yam kho āvuso dukkhe aññānam,
dukkhasamudaye aññānam,
dukkhanirodhe aññānam,
dukkhanirodhagāminīpatipadāya aññānam,
ayam vuccat'āvuso avijjā.
(Majjhima i,9 <M.i,54>)

Katamañ ca bhikkhave dukkham ariyasaccam...
Katamañ ca bhikkhave dukkhasamudayam ariyasaccam...
Katamañ ca bhikkhave dukkhanirodham ariyasaccam...
Katamañ ca bhikkhave dukkhanirodhagāminīpatipadā ariyasaccam.

Ayam eva ariyo atthangiko maggo,
seyyathīdam sammāditthi...
Katamā ca bhikkhave sammāditthi...
Yam kho bhikkhave dukkhe ñānam,
dukkhasamudaye ñānam,
dukkhanirodhe ñānam,
dukkhanirodhagāminīpatipadāya ñānam,
ayam vuccati bhikkhave sammāditthi.
(Dīgha ii,9 <D.ii,305-12>)

But which, friends, is nescience?...
That which is non-knowledge of suffering,
non-knowledge of arising of suffering,
non-knowledge of ceasing of suffering,
non-knowledge of the way that leads to ceasing of suffering,
this, friends, is called nescience.

And which, monks, is the noble truth of suffering...
And which, monks, is the noble truth of arising of suffering...
And which, monks, is the noble truth of ceasing of suffering...
And which, monks, is the noble truth of the way that leads to ceasing of suffering?

Just this noble eight-factored path,
that is to say: right view...
And which, monks, is right view?...
That which is knowledge of suffering,
knowledge of arising of suffering,
knowledge of ceasing of suffering,
knowledge of the way that leads to ceasing of suffering,
this, monks, is called right view.

Avijjā is non-knowledge of the four noble truths. Sammāditthi is knowledge of the four noble truths. But sammāditthi is part of the four noble truths. Thus avijjā is non-knowledge of sammāditthi; that is to say, non-knowledge of knowledge of the four noble truths. But since sammāditthi, which is knowledge of the four noble truths, is part of the four noble truths, so avijjā is non-knowledge of knowledge of knowledge of the four noble truths. And so we can go on indefinitely. But the point to be noted is that each of these successive stages represents an additional layer of (potentially) reflexive avijjā. Non-knowledge of knowledge of the four noble truths is non-knowledge of vijjā, and non-knowledge of vijjā is failure to recognize avijjā as avijjā. Conversely, it is evident that when avijjā is once recognized anywhere in this structure it must vanish everywhere; for knowledge of the four noble truths entails knowledge of knowledge of the four noble truths, and vijjā ('science') replaces avijjā ('nescience') throughout.
I think that's why one does only make little Dhamma-progress until the realisation of at least sotapatti. Because it's more a running in circles until the point when one finally has one's foot in the door of Dhamma.
I also agree with Ben,
Ben wrote:Hi Retro
retrofuturist wrote:In fact, I've also heard that one only truly sees them fully with stream-entry... which, if true, almost seems to lead to a bit of a Catch-22 situation.
I don't believe so. At least for me, its an iterative process. One begins by observing anicca. As one develops one's sensitivity towards the anicca characteristic in phenomena, both dukkha and anatta characteristics becomes increasingly evident, increasing familiarity and knowledge of one support the knowledge of all until culmination as an ariya. And I want to make it clear I am not claiming to be an ariya.
I think this process of gradual realization is inferred also in the nine vipassana nanas.
metta
Ben
My experience is quite similar. I'm sure there's a connection between seeing avijja as avijja and seeing the three characteristics, which enables one who sees it for himself to release himself from (at least) the first three fetters for this reason.

best wishes, acinteyyo
Thag 1.20. Ajita - I do not fear death; nor do I long for life. I’ll lay down this body, aware and mindful.
User avatar
tiltbillings
Posts: 23046
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2008 9:25 am

Re: Sabbe sankhara dukkha - how to observe this Dhamma?

Post by tiltbillings »

pt1 wrote:Hi tilt,
tiltbillings wrote:Actually, dhammas are not the object of awareness, either. Dhammas are how we can talk about our experience after the fact, which means that "dhamma" is a conceptual structure used for talking about a type of meditative experience.
As expressed in previous discussions, I find it hard to accept that your interpretation is actually borne out by theravadin texts. I make a case for a different interpretation in this thread.

Would be glad to hear on which particular points you disagree. Thanks.

Best wishes
Are you saying that calling a bit of experience a "dhamma" is not using a conceptual structure? A conceptual structure certainly can be used in practice, but the problem is assuming that they are referring to existent things and that experience is made up of real little real bits. Are saying there are little bits of existing things that pop into existence because of conditions and pop out of existence because of a change in conditions?
>> Do you see a man wise [enlightened/ariya] in his own eyes? There is more hope for a fool than for him.<< -- Proverbs 26:12

This being is bound to samsara, kamma is his means for going beyond. -- SN I, 38.

“Of course it is happening inside your head, Harry, but why on earth should that mean that it is not real?” HPatDH p.723
Post Reply