The teachings of Ven. Waharaka Abhayaratanalankara Thero

A forum for Dhamma resources in languages other than English
SarathW
Posts: 7804
Joined: Mon Sep 10, 2012 2:49 am

Re: The teachings of Ven. Waharaka Abhayaratanalankara Thero

Postby SarathW » Tue Apr 18, 2017 12:14 pm

SarathW wrote:Thank you, Lal, it is a detailed explanation.
Did Buddha teach not-self or non-self at all?
If yes which Sutta you find it.
Is it important to realise non-self for attaining sotapanna?
Is it important to understand non-self for attaining Nibbana?
What is the salient difference in Buddha's teaching and another Brahmanical teaching?

Hi Lal
I am still waiting for an answer for this. Thanks.
“As the lamp consumes oil, the path realises Nibbana”

SarathW
Posts: 7804
Joined: Mon Sep 10, 2012 2:49 am

Re: The teachings of Ven. Waharaka Abhayaratanalankara Thero

Postby SarathW » Tue Apr 18, 2017 12:16 pm

SarathW wrote:
We need to address and resolve this issue about getting stuck in whether it is “atta”, “attha”, or even “aththa”.


Hi Lal
What is the essence of Anatta Lakhana Sutta?
Is it about what is profitable?
What is the most important thing realised by the world (earth) first Sotapanna?(Kondanna)

Hi Lal
I am waiting for answer for this as well.
“As the lamp consumes oil, the path realises Nibbana”

Lal
Posts: 25
Joined: Thu Jun 23, 2016 11:39 am

Re: The teachings of Ven. Waharaka Abhayaratanalankara Thero

Postby Lal » Tue Apr 18, 2017 11:26 pm

Hi SarathW,

I did reply to these questions in the other thread. But here are the two answers:

1. Anatta is discussed with several suttas in the following post, and Anatta Lakhana Sutta is one:
https://puredhamma.net/key-dhamma-conce ... ey-suttas/

2. SarathW said,
Did Buddha teach not-self or non-self at all?


He said it is neither. In very simple terms, people do exist in the world, so one cannot say there is “no self”. But no person remains the same, so one cannot say there is “self”.
In the Brahmajala sutta, the Buddha explained that both views of “self” and ‘no self” are wrong and they are included in the 62 types of mica ditthi.
Then you have answers to all other questions.

With metta, Lal

SarathW
Posts: 7804
Joined: Mon Sep 10, 2012 2:49 am

Re: The teachings of Ven. Waharaka Abhayaratanalankara Thero

Postby SarathW » Wed Apr 19, 2017 11:08 am

Lal wrote:Hi SarathW,

I did reply to these questions in the other thread. But here are the two answers:

1. Anatta is discussed with several suttas in the following post, and Anatta Lakhana Sutta is one:
https://puredhamma.net/key-dhamma-conce ... ey-suttas/

2. SarathW said,
Did Buddha teach not-self or non-self at all?


He said it is neither. In very simple terms, people do exist in the world, so one cannot say there is “no self”. But no person remains the same, so one cannot say there is “self”.
In the Brahmajala sutta, the Buddha explained that both views of “self” and ‘no self” are wrong and they are included in the 62 types of mica ditthi.
Then you have answers to all other questions.

With metta, Lal

Thank you, Lal, in your opinion what is the salient difference in Buddha's teaching and another Brahmanical teaching?
Do you think Anatta is a pre-Buddha's teaching?
“As the lamp consumes oil, the path realises Nibbana”

SarathW
Posts: 7804
Joined: Mon Sep 10, 2012 2:49 am

Re: The teachings of Ven. Waharaka Abhayaratanalankara Thero

Postby SarathW » Wed Apr 19, 2017 11:10 am

In the following video Ven. Abhaya says that Sotapanna can break the five precepts.
This is not in line with the detailed discussion we had in this forum.
viewtopic.php?f=13&t=14256&hilit=

“As the lamp consumes oil, the path realises Nibbana”

SarathW
Posts: 7804
Joined: Mon Sep 10, 2012 2:49 am

Re: The teachings of Ven. Waharaka Abhayaratanalankara Thero

Postby SarathW » Thu Apr 20, 2017 6:58 am

“As the lamp consumes oil, the path realises Nibbana”

SarathW
Posts: 7804
Joined: Mon Sep 10, 2012 2:49 am

Re: The teachings of Ven. Waharaka Abhayaratanalankara Thero

Postby SarathW » Thu Apr 20, 2017 9:16 am

In this video Ven, Abhaya asks supporters to give cash instead of giving robes. (because they have excess supply)
He compares monks handling money to a cash handled by a lay person.
He fails to disclose that it is the tenth precept undertaken by a monk.
Please see the discussion on this topic.

viewtopic.php?f=30&t=28117&hilit=


“As the lamp consumes oil, the path realises Nibbana”

Lal
Posts: 25
Joined: Thu Jun 23, 2016 11:39 am

Re: The teachings of Ven. Waharaka Abhayaratanalankara Thero

Postby Lal » Thu Apr 20, 2017 1:12 pm

1. SarathW said,
Thank you, Lal, in your opinion what is the salient difference in Buddha's teaching and another Brahmanical teaching?
Do you think Anatta is a pre-Buddha's teaching?


Only a Buddha can reveal the three words (anicca, dukkha, anatta) to the world.
Attakkara theenapada Sambuddhena pakasitha, na hi sila vatan hotu uppajjatthi Tathagata“, which means, “a Buddha (Tathagata) is born NOT just to show how to live a moral life, but to reveal three words (theenapada) to the world” .

Anicca – that nothing in this world can bring a permanent happiness in the long run.
Dukkha – despite our struggles, we will be subjected to much more suffering than pleasures if we remain in the rebirth process. The truth about Dukkha is not the feeling of dukkha, but that dukkha arises because of craving for enjoyments.
Anatta – therefore, one is truly helpless in this struggle to attain “something of essence in this world”. The only refuge is in Nibbana.

So, there is no way to become a Sotapanna if one believes anicca is impermanence, dukkha is suffering (not the cause of suffering), and anatta is “no self”.

Here is an important point that needs to be given some thought for those who believe anatta means “no self” I am not saying this in a derogatory way, but just to emphasize the importance of it. The true meanings have been covered not due to intentional acts by anyone, as I have explained in the post: https://puredhamma.net/historical-backg ... retations/.

The Patama Adhamma Sutta in the Anguttara Nikaya (https://suttacentral.net/pi/an10.113) says:“Adhammo ca, bhikkhave, veditabbo anattho ca; dhammo ca veditabbo attho ca“.
 It means: “Bhikkhus, it is to be comprehended that adhamma leads to anattä (helplessness), and dhamma leads to attä (refuge in Nibbana)”.
 Furthermore, one should be able to clearly see that it leads to the foolish statement: “Bhikkhus, it is to be comprehended that adhamma leads to no-self, and dhamma leads to self“.

The Anatta Lakkhana Sutta (https://suttacentral.net/pi/sn22.59) says, "..Vedanā anattā. Vedanā ca hidaṃ, bhikkhave, attā abhavissa, nayidaṃ vedanā ābādhāya saṃvatteyya, labbhetha ca vedanāya: ‘evaṃ me vedanā hotu, evaṃ me vedanā mā ahosī’ti. Yasmā ca kho, bhikkhave, vedanā anattā,."
So, what is meant by "..vedana is no self"?
Same for sanna, sankhara, and vinnana. How can they be "no self"?

2. SarathW said,
In the following video Ven. Abhaya says that Sotapanna can break the five precepts.


A Sotapanna clearly understands the dangers of dasa akusala.
But he has removed only one of them: mica ditthi, which is the strongest. 99% of the defilements are removed from his/her mind.
https://puredhamma.net/seeking-nibbana/ ... sotapanna/

There are six things that a Sotapanna is incapable of: killing mother or father, killing an Arahant, injuring a Buddha, knowingly causing schism in Sangha, and having niyata micca ditthi or established wrong views.
The first five are anantariya papa kamma, i.e., one WILL be born in the apayas when one dies. If one has having niyata micca ditthi, then one has not lost the POTENTIAL to be born in the apayas in the future.

In the Ratana sutta: "..Catūhapāyehi ca vippamutto,
Chaccābhiṭhānāni abhabba kātuṃ";
Or “..catu apeye hi ca vippamutto, cha ca abhithanani abhabba katum” or “(A Sotapanna is) free of the four apayas, and impossible (abhabba) for him/her to do (katum) six (cha) major wrong doings (abhithanani), which includes five anantariya papa kamma and niyata mica ditthi".

With metta, Lal

SarathW
Posts: 7804
Joined: Mon Sep 10, 2012 2:49 am

Re: The teachings of Ven. Waharaka Abhayaratanalankara Thero

Postby SarathW » Thu Apr 20, 2017 10:12 pm

It appears Ven. Abhaya got another sutta in a wrong way.
He criticise the monk who practices on Attika (bone) and seen a woman who met on the road as a bag of bones.
He says this monk had Sannna Vipalassa.

“As the lamp consumes oil, the path realises Nibbana”

SarathW
Posts: 7804
Joined: Mon Sep 10, 2012 2:49 am

Re: The teachings of Ven. Waharaka Abhayaratanalankara Thero

Postby SarathW » Fri Apr 21, 2017 12:48 am

Lal wrote:1. SarathW said,
Thank you, Lal, in your opinion what is the salient difference in Buddha's teaching and another Brahmanical teaching?
Do you think Anatta is a pre-Buddha's teaching?


Only a Buddha can reveal the three words (anicca, dukkha, anatta) to the world.
Attakkara theenapada Sambuddhena pakasitha, na hi sila vatan hotu uppajjatthi Tathagata“, which means, “a Buddha (Tathagata) is born NOT just to show how to live a moral life, but to reveal three words (theenapada) to the world” .

Anicca – that nothing in this world can bring a permanent happiness in the long run.
Dukkha – despite our struggles, we will be subjected to much more suffering than pleasures if we remain in the rebirth process. The truth about Dukkha is not the feeling of dukkha, but that dukkha arises because of craving for enjoyments.
Anatta – therefore, one is truly helpless in this struggle to attain “something of essence in this world”. The only refuge is in Nibbana.

So, there is no way to become a Sotapanna if one believes anicca is impermanence, dukkha is suffering (not the cause of suffering), and anatta is “no self”.

Here is an important point that needs to be given some thought for those who believe anatta means “no self” I am not saying this in a derogatory way, but just to emphasize the importance of it. The true meanings have been covered not due to intentional acts by anyone, as I have explained in the post: https://puredhamma.net/historical-backg ... retations/.

The Patama Adhamma Sutta in the Anguttara Nikaya (https://suttacentral.net/pi/an10.113) says:“Adhammo ca, bhikkhave, veditabbo anattho ca; dhammo ca veditabbo attho ca“.
 It means: “Bhikkhus, it is to be comprehended that adhamma leads to anattä (helplessness), and dhamma leads to attä (refuge in Nibbana)”.
 Furthermore, one should be able to clearly see that it leads to the foolish statement: “Bhikkhus, it is to be comprehended that adhamma leads to no-self, and dhamma leads to self“.

The Anatta Lakkhana Sutta (https://suttacentral.net/pi/sn22.59) says, "..Vedanā anattā. Vedanā ca hidaṃ, bhikkhave, attā abhavissa, nayidaṃ vedanā ābādhāya saṃvatteyya, labbhetha ca vedanāya: ‘evaṃ me vedanā hotu, evaṃ me vedanā mā ahosī’ti. Yasmā ca kho, bhikkhave, vedanā anattā,."
So, what is meant by "..vedana is no self"?
Same for sanna, sankhara, and vinnana. How can they be "no self"?

".

With metta, Lal


Thanks Lal, I open a new post.
viewtopic.php?f=13&t=29439
“As the lamp consumes oil, the path realises Nibbana”

freedom
Posts: 159
Joined: Wed Nov 19, 2014 1:44 am

Re: The teachings of Ven. Waharaka Abhayaratanalankara Thero

Postby freedom » Fri Apr 21, 2017 2:05 am

Anicca – that nothing in this world can bring a permanent happiness in the long run.

Does this mean that there is something else in other worlds that will bring permanent happiness? If so, which world and what is that?
Dukkha – despite our struggles, we will be subjected to much more suffering than pleasures if we remain in the rebirth process. The truth about Dukkha is not the feeling of dukkha, but that dukkha arises because of craving for enjoyments.

I suffered because my dad was seriously sick. I have to deal with so many headache things to support him and I really did not want to see him struggling. My dad was sick not because I was craving for any enjoyments. What did I enjoy that made him sick?
Anatta – therefore, one is truly helpless in this struggle to attain “something of essence in this world”. The only refuge is in Nibbana.

When we say that one cannot attain "something of essence in this world". Does this mean that one may attain it in other world?. Can I attain something of essence in heaven? Why not? Is Nibbana a world? Does Nibbana have "something of essence" for me to attain? If so, what is that? and how can it free me from all sufferings?
One should not be negligent of discernment, should guard the truth, be devoted to relinquishment, and train only for calm - MN 140.

Lal
Posts: 25
Joined: Thu Jun 23, 2016 11:39 am

Re: The teachings of Ven. Waharaka Abhayaratanalankara Thero

Postby Lal » Fri Apr 21, 2017 5:53 pm

freedom said,
Anicca – that nothing in this world can bring a permanent happiness in the long run.

Does this mean that there is something else in other worlds that will bring permanent happiness? If so, which world and what is that?


There is no refuge anywhere in this world of 31 realms, including deva and brahma worlds. Of course we can “see” only two realms: animal and human realms. We cannot “see” television and cell phone signals, but they exist around us, because we can watch television and talk to a person outside the country using a cell phone. It takes a lot of effort to verify for oneself the existence of other realms. The only refuge is to stop the rebirth process. That is called Nibbana. That is where the permanent happiness is.

Dukkha – despite our struggles, we will be subjected to much more suffering than pleasures if we remain in the rebirth process. The truth about Dukkha is not the feeling of dukkha, but that dukkha arises because of craving for enjoyments.

I suffered because my dad was seriously sick. I have to deal with so many headache things to support him and I really did not want to see him struggling. My dad was sick not because I was craving for any enjoyments. What did I enjoy that made him sick?


Each one carries his/her own kamma.
Dad was suffering because of some bad deeds done by him either in this life or in past lives.
Whatever you do now (good or bad), you will reap corresponding results in the future, either in this life or in future lives.
In Buddha Dhamma, one cannot have a short-term view. Existence does not end with the end of this life. There are many people who get away with even murder in courts, but they will pay later in this life or in future lives.

Anatta – therefore, one is truly helpless in this struggle to attain “something of essence in this world”. The only refuge is in Nibbana.

When we say that one cannot attain "something of essence in this world". Does this mean that one may attain it in other world?. Can I attain something of essence in heaven? Why not? Is Nibbana a world? Does Nibbana have "something of essence" for me to attain? If so, what is that? and how can it free me from all sufferings?


This – as well as your above questions -- cannot be answered even in a few pages. I would suggest to read up on kamma/kamma vipaka, rebirth process, cause and effect, Nibbana, etc. There are many posts at the site:
https://puredhamma.net/
And one can find relevant posts by using the “Search” button on top right.

Briefly, as I mentioned above “something of essence” is attained only in Nibbana.
One needs to understand what Buddha Dhamma is.

General comment: This is a problem that I see with many people in discussion forums. They quote from suttas, but have no basic understanding of the key message of the Buddha or a basic understanding of key concepts like kamma/kamma vipaka, rebirth process, cause and effect, Nibbana, etc. And they expect answers to their questions in one paragraph. That is impossible to do.

With metta, Lal

freedom
Posts: 159
Joined: Wed Nov 19, 2014 1:44 am

Re: The teachings of Ven. Waharaka Abhayaratanalankara Thero

Postby freedom » Sat Apr 22, 2017 12:21 am

There is no refuge anywhere in this world of 31 realms, including deva and brahma worlds.

First, this is not included in your definition of Anicca. I think you can see that your definition is not completed while you are rejecting the common meaning of "impermance".

Second, how do you know? Do you have direct experience in 31 realms? The Buddha said that the Dhamma can be experienced here and now. Come and see. Whatever I cannot experience, I will set it aside for now.

You said that dukkha arises because of craving for enjoyments. My question is "what did I crave for enjoyments in that case?" Why did I suffer?

You said that “something of essence” is attained only in Nibbana. What is Nibbana? What is that "something of essence"? What it can do? Why it is attainable only in Nibbana? Do you know "that essence" by direct experience? Did you see somebody attained "that essense" in Nibbana?

To me, wherever there is a "I, my", there is/will be suffering no matter what or where that "I" is. I can see this very clearly here and now. This is a direct experience. Not through books, theories or speculation. Can you find any "my" that does/will not bring suffering?

I can see the impermanence of that "I, my" and the sufferings that they will bring to me when the condition is right. All of my love ones are impermanent. They are all subjected to old age, sickness and death,... All my possessions are subjected to theft, decay, missing,... When the time come, they will blow up and I will suffer. I am living in a mine field!

I can see the sufferings behind what I think "my happiness". I can feel the sufferings of a caring mother watching her "happiness, belove little child" dying in her hand. I can see that "belove little child" actually does not belong to that caring mother no matter what she think or try!

This is hard for anyone with full of craving for possession to see or accept. All we want is "more" for me, not "less".

If annata is unbeneficial. This means all phenomena are unbeneficial. However, I see my house is very beneficial for me during the rainning season (even if it is impermanent). When I am hungry, the little food that I got was very beneficial to me...
I can see the Buddha Dhamma is very beneficial to me, so I can see the truth.
If they are not beneficial, why do we need them?


As a Dhamma's friend, I suggest that you may want to take a hard look to your view. If you think you are correct, Great! ignore what I said.
If your view is incorrect and you cling to it. You will harm not only yourself, but a lot of other people because you are trying to teach others the wrong Dhamma! This will not without horrible consequences for a very long time no matter how noble your intention is.

I see that you are very much cling to your view, so I will no longer try to question your view. This is the last response I am making to this post.
Thanks for your feedback to my comment.
One should not be negligent of discernment, should guard the truth, be devoted to relinquishment, and train only for calm - MN 140.


Return to “Non-English Resources”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests

Google Saffron, Theravada Search Engine