Avijja translated as "Insentience"

Exploring modern Theravāda interpretations of the Buddha's teaching.
User avatar
Coëmgenu
Posts: 1618
Joined: Mon Jun 13, 2016 10:55 pm

Re: Avijja translated as "Insentience"

Post by Coëmgenu » Thu Jan 18, 2018 2:15 am

Saengnapha wrote:
Wed Jan 17, 2018 6:14 am
Coëmgenu wrote:
Tue Jan 16, 2018 5:29 am
Garrib wrote:
Mon Jan 15, 2018 7:44 pm
Thanks James,

What you write makes sense to me, but I am still confused about the translation of avijja as insentience...It sounds like 'insentience' (cessation of perception and feeling) is what stops DO?? But in DO, avijja is the cause for the arising of subsequent links.

Any thoughts?
Does Ven Bunnaji have precedence in stating that the Buddha "has" avijja? I thought getting "rid" of avijja was central to the Buddha's path as usually taught.
From what I gather, Bhante P describes the cylce of DO as it occurs in non-Arahants & Buddhas.
Does that mean Buddhas & sentient beings but not Arahants, or a cycle of DO unique to Sammāsambuddhas?
子念昔貧,志意下劣,今於父所,大獲珍寶,并及舍宅、一切財物。甚大歡喜,得未曾有。
The son thought of past poverty, outlook humble, now having from father a treasure harvest, also father's house, all his wealth. Great joy - to have what was never before had.

Τῆς πατρῴας, δόξης σου, ἀποσκιρτήσας ἀφρόνως, ἐν κακοῖς ἐσκόρπισα, ὅν μοι παρέδωκας πλοῦτον· ὅθεν σοι τὴν τοῦ Ἀσώτου, φωνὴν κραυγάζω· Ἥμαρτον ἐνώπιόν σου Πάτερ οἰκτίρμον, δέξαι με μετανοοῦντα, καὶ ποίησόν με, ὡς ἕνα τῶν μισθίων σου.
Your fatherly due I withheld unthinking, in evil I wasted your wealth; a prodigal cries, "I've erred, father, receive the repentant as serf."

妙法蓮華經 Κοντάκιον τοῦ Ἀσώτου

Saengnapha
Posts: 687
Joined: Wed Sep 13, 2017 10:17 am

Re: Avijja translated as "Insentience"

Post by Saengnapha » Thu Jan 18, 2018 2:49 am

Coëmgenu wrote:
Thu Jan 18, 2018 2:15 am
Saengnapha wrote:
Wed Jan 17, 2018 6:14 am
Coëmgenu wrote:
Tue Jan 16, 2018 5:29 am


Does Ven Bunnaji have precedence in stating that the Buddha "has" avijja? I thought getting "rid" of avijja was central to the Buddha's path as usually taught.
From what I gather, Bhante P describes the cylce of DO as it occurs in non-Arahants & Buddhas.
Does that mean Buddhas & sentient beings but not Arahants, or a cycle of DO unique to Sammāsambuddhas?
Sorry for the confusion. My faulty writing.
He describes DO in two ways. The way non-Ariyas experience it and the way Ariyas experience it which liberates them from birth and death cycle. The intellectual understanding of DO does not liberate and the cycle begins again.

James Tan
Posts: 143
Joined: Sun Jun 04, 2017 1:26 pm

Re: Avijja translated as "Insentience"

Post by James Tan » Sat Jan 20, 2018 5:27 pm

Garrib wrote:
Mon Jan 15, 2018 7:44 pm
Thanks James,

What you write makes sense to me, but I am still confused about the translation of avijja as insentience...It sounds like 'insentience' (cessation of perception and feeling) is what stops DO?? But in DO, avijja is the cause for the arising of subsequent links.

Any thoughts?
Hi Garibb , I think we should put aside insentience .
Avijja is not knowing . Not " Unconscious " .
Avijja is not knowing the 4NT and how the sense organ relate to sense object , that give rise to
" self " & the rest .
Therefore , coming back to the DO , you don't have to attain nirodha samapatti in order to attain liberation ! That is IMO , corrupted teachings . If you refer back to sutta (maybe someone familiar with sutta can help) how many Buddha's disciples attained nirodha Samapatti that attained liberation .

The problem with scholars nowadays is , they still could not come to a conclusion what is the true meaning of the links , how all the links manifest .
The interpretation varies from each other .
:shrug:

dharmacorps
Posts: 314
Joined: Thu Aug 06, 2015 7:33 pm

Re: Avijja translated as "Insentience"

Post by dharmacorps » Sat Jan 20, 2018 6:57 pm

It depends how ignorance is seen-- my understanding of Avijja is that it is not NOT knowing something, its not understanding the information correctly. That's ignorance from the Buddha's perspective. Maybe the term may be better put as "confusion"?

Saengnapha
Posts: 687
Joined: Wed Sep 13, 2017 10:17 am

Re: Avijja translated as "Insentience"

Post by Saengnapha » Sun Jan 21, 2018 4:33 am

James Tan wrote:
Sat Jan 20, 2018 5:27 pm
Garrib wrote:
Mon Jan 15, 2018 7:44 pm
Thanks James,

What you write makes sense to me, but I am still confused about the translation of avijja as insentience...It sounds like 'insentience' (cessation of perception and feeling) is what stops DO?? But in DO, avijja is the cause for the arising of subsequent links.

Any thoughts?
Hi Garibb , I think we should put aside insentience .
Avijja is not knowing . Not " Unconscious " .
Avijja is not knowing the 4NT and how the sense organ relate to sense object , that give rise to
" self " & the rest .
Therefore , coming back to the DO , you don't have to attain nirodha samapatti in order to attain liberation ! That is IMO , corrupted teachings . If you refer back to sutta (maybe someone familiar with sutta can help) how many Buddha's disciples attained nirodha Samapatti that attained liberation .

The problem with scholars nowadays is , they still could not come to a conclusion what is the true meaning of the links , how all the links manifest .
The interpretation varies from each other .
:shrug:
Bhante P has also referred to it as unconscious, but not knowing seems to be his preferred definition. It is the sphere before your birth and the world's presence. It is this condition that allows for formations to arise and hence, consciousness. Each condition present for the next link to appear in the 12 links of existence.

Nirodha Samapatti is not an attainment. It is a complete shutting down, a cessation of the process of perception. No mind. The Buddha awakened from this and was able to fully experience how the world, things, and self are created by direct experiencing DO, not through a mental process as you are trying to do by explaining this the way you are doing. Of course, I understand that you are trying to conceptualize all of this. This will not prove anything and is not even remotely connected to your own experience except through your own imagination at this point. This is why direct experience is the only to way to 'prove' anything, and you are only 'proving' it to yourself. No one can say what Nirodha Samapatti is, that is why scholars cannot translate this or why there are not more attempts to clarify what takes place. It is not part of their own experience and lies outside of the field of 'knowledge', which is existence. All those who have been liberated have transcended existence. How can this ever be stated in the right words?

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Crazy cloud and 5 guests