The teachings of Ven. Waharaka Abhayaratanalankara Thero

[DooDoot]

@[name redacted by admin], @robertk, @SarathW, @DooDoot, @Dhammanando:

The real nature of viññāna as cause for suffering is clearly stated in the “Dvaya­tānu­passa­nā­sutta (Sutta Nipata 3.12)“:

“Yaṃ kiñci dukkhaṃ sambhoti,
Sabbaṃ viññāṇapaccayā;
Viññāṇassa nirodhena,
Natthi dukkhassa sambhavo“.

Translated: “Whatever suffering that arises, all that arises due to viññāṇa; With the not arising of viññāṇa, there is no existence with suffering“.

Thank you for mentioning me in your post. However, the core Dhamma is obviously not found in obscure hidden suttas. The Buddha identified craving as the cause for suffering. As for vinnana, it appears to be a cause for wisdom & liberation. Whatever is written in Snp 3.12, it seems obvious you have misinterpreted it.

Discernment (wisdom) & consciousness are conjoined, friend, not disjoined. It's not possible, having separated them one from the other, to delineate the difference between them. For what one discerns, that one cognizes. What one cognizes, that one discerns.

MN 43

Dvaya­tānu­passa­nā­sutta (Sutta Nipata 3.12):

“Yaṃ kiñci dukkhaṃ sambhoti,
Sabbaṃ viññāṇapaccayā;
Viññāṇassa nirodhena,
Natthi dukkhassa sambhavo“.

I translate is as: “Whatever suffering that arises, all that arises with viññāṇa as a condition; With "not arising of viññāṇa", there is no existence with suffering“.

How would you translate it?

Even excellent Pali grammartarians don't distinguish between the Pali such as words "cause" ("hetu"), 'nidana' ("cause; source") and "paccaya" ("condition"). I think one should be very wary of claims about "synonyms".

As for the sutta, consistent with the Dhamma, it identifies "attachment" ("upadhi") as the cause (nidānā) of suffering. The sutta says:

“Upadhinidānā pabhavanti dukkhā,
Ye keci lokasmimanekarūpā;
Yo ve avidvā upadhiṃ karoti,
Punappunaṃ dukkhamupeti mando;
Tasmā pajānaṃ upadhiṃ na kayirā,
Dukkhassa jātippabhavānupassīti.

The manifold stresses
that come into play in the world,
come from acquisition as their cause.
Anyone not knowing [this]
creates acquisition.
The fool, he comes to stress
again & again.
Therefore, discerning [this],
you shouldn't create acquisition
as you contemplate birth
as what brings stress
into play.

Jātimaraṇasaṃsāraṃ,
ye vajanti punappunaṃ;
Itthabhāvaññathābhāvaṃ,
avijjāyeva sā gati.

Avijjā hāyaṃ mahāmoho,
Yenidaṃ saṃsitaṃ ciraṃ;
Vijjāgatā ca ye sattā,
Na te gacchanti punabbhavanti.

Those who journey the wandering-on
through birth & death, again & again,
in this state here
or anywhere else,
that destination is simply through ignorance.
This ignorance is a great delusion
whereby they have wandered-on
a long, long time.
While beings immersed in clear knowing
don't go to further becoming.

The words "hetu"; "nidānā"; "pabhavā"; "samudayā" ; "jātikā"; etc, are not necessarily synonymous with the word "paccaya". Therefore, when Sutta Nipata 3.12 refers to "viññāṇapaccayā", this not necessarily mean "cause".

A knife is a good example. A knife is a "condition" ("paccaya") for the act or arising ("samudhaya") of murder but a knife does not "cause" ("hetu") murder. What causes murder is ignorance, craving & attachment.

[Lal]

Hello Mike,

So, are you saying that an Arahant generates new vinnana, just because his/her vinnanakkhanadha exists until Parinibbana?

An Arahant does have a vinnanakkhandha that has accumulated from a "beginning-less time". But that does not mean he/she generates NEW vinnana AFTER attaining Arahanthood.

As I pointed out above, all suffering (rebirths) are due to the generation of vinnana, and attaining Nibbana is the same as "vinnana nirodha", i.e., no NEW vinnana arise in an Arahant. If you translate that verse differently to mean something else, please explain what it means.

[DooDoot]

As I pointed out above, all suffering (rebirths) are due to the generation of vinnana, and attaining Nibbana is the same as "vinnana nirodha", i.e., no NEW vinnana arise in an Arahant. If you translate that verse differently to mean something else, please explain what it means.

I would recommend to read my post rather than clinging tenaciously to wrong views and posting them repeatedly after they have been corrected. What you "pointed out" appeared to be a misinterpretation of the Pali.

So, are you saying that an Arahant generates new vinnana, just because his/her vinnanakkhanadha exists until Parinibbana?[/i].

An arahant has vinnana. Refer to Iti 44; SN 22.53; SN 22.85; MN 38 (end); etc. Words such as "nirodha" and "paccaya" probably don't mean what you think those words mean.

The sutta sAYS:

Knowing this as it actually is,
an attainer-of-wisdom
sees rightly.
Seeing rightly,
the wise —
overcoming the fetter of Mara —
go to no further becoming.

How can an arahant "know & see" without vinnana?

[mikenz66]

Hello Mike,

So, are you saying that an Arahant generates new vinnana, just because his/her vinnanakkhanadha exists until Parinibbana?

An Arahant does have a vinnanakkhandha that has accumulated from a "beginning-less time". But that does not mean he/she generates NEW vinnana AFTER attaining Arahanthood.

As I pointed out above, all suffering (rebirths) are due to the generation of vinnana, and attaining Nibbana is the same as "vinnana nirodha", i.e., no NEW vinnana arise in an Arahant. If you translate that verse differently to mean something else, please explain what it means.

Hmm, not sure about "generation". Not sure what you mean by that. An arahant is conscious of pleasant and painful feelings, according to the suttas I quoted, until nibbana without residue (parinibbana is not the correct term, in itself: viewtopic.php?t=17089#p244146).

I don't really have much more to add. Perhaps you are using a different model from the ones I'm used to (such as the commentaries and Ven Nananada's expositions).


Mike

[DooDoot]

Hmm, not sure about "generation". Not sure what you mean by that.

The Pali does not mention the word "generation" in relation to consciousness. The Pali only refers to the "generation" or "coming to be" of suffering. The Pali is:

Yaṃ kiñci dukkhaṃ sambhoti,
Sabbaṃ viññāṇapaccayā;
Viññāṇassa nirodhena,
Natthi dukkhassa sambhavo.

[DooDoot]

For the Arahant Transcendental DO applies.

Where does the sutta call this "DO"?

Perhaps Lal may be correct. I do not think that we can use the word Vinnana to identify Arahant's consciousness.

Why? MN 38; MN 148; SN 22.53.

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. He discerns that 'Birth is ended, the holy life fulfilled, the task done. There is nothing further for this world.'"

SN 22.53

[Lal]

@SarathW:
You said: "For the Arahant Transcendental DO applies."
That is exactly the point. Vinnana appears only in the mundane or "akusala-mula" paticca samuppada (PS). In PS cycles for Arahants, there is no vinnana.

@DooDoot:
You said: "However, the core Dhamma is obviously not found in obscure hidden suttas."

How about the “Maha Nidana Sutta (Digha Nikaya 15)” where the Buddha has the following exchange with Ven. Ananda:

"Viññāṇapaccayā nāmarūpan’ti iti kho panetaṃ vuttaṃ, tadānanda, imināpetaṃ pariyāyena veditabbaṃ, yathā viññāṇapaccayā nāmarūpaṃ. Viññāṇañca hi, ānanda, mātukucchismiṃ na okkamissatha, api nu kho nāmarūpaṃ mātukucchismiṃ samuccissathā”ti? “No hetaṃ, bhante”. “Viññāṇañca hi, ānanda, mātukucchismiṃ okkamitvā vokkamissatha, api nu kho nāmarūpaṃ itthattāya abhi­nib­bat­tis­sathā”ti? “No hetaṃ, bhante”. “Viññāṇañca hi, ānanda, daharasseva sato voc­chij­jis­satha kumārakassa vā kumārikāya vā, api nu kho nāmarūpaṃ vuddhiṃ virūḷhiṃ vepullaṃ āpajjissathā”ti? “No hetaṃ, bhante”. “Tasmātihānanda, eseva hetu etaṃ nidānaṃ esa samudayo esa paccayo nāmarūpassa—yadidaṃ viññāṇaṃ.

Here is my English translation:

“It was said: ‘With defiled consciousness (vinnana) as condition there is nāmarūpa (normally translated as mentality-materiality"

How that is so, Ānanda, should be understood in this way: If consciousness (Viññāṇañca) were not to descend (na okkamissatha) into the mother’s womb, would that nāmarūpa take shape in the womb?”

“Certainly not, venerable sir.”

“If, after descending (okkamitvā) into the womb, consciousness were to depart (vokkamissatha), would that nāmarūpa be generated into this present state of being?”

“Certainly not, venerable sir.”

“If the consciousness of a young boy or girl (kumārakassa vā kumārikāya vā) were to be come out, would that nāmarūpa grow up, develop, and reach maturity?”

“Certainly not, venerable sir.”

“Therefore, Ānanda, this is the cause, source, origin, and condition (eseva hetu etaṃ nidānaṃ esa samudayo) for nāmarūpa, namely, defiled consciousness (yadidaṃ viññāṇaṃ).

This is from #7 of my post: "https://puredhamma.net/living-dhamma/na ... ceda-nana/".

How would you or an "excellent Pali grammartarian" translate the above verse?

You said: "I would recommend to read my post rather than clinging tenaciously to wrong views and posting them repeatedly after they have been corrected."

If we can continue the discussion without throwing accusations, it will become clear at the end who has wrong views.
Also, how would you translate the key verse:
"Yaṃ kiñci dukkhaṃ sambhoti,
sabbaṃ saṅ­khā­ra­pac­cayā;
Saṅkhārānaṃ nirodhena,
natthi dukkhassa sambhavo."

There is no need to analyze other verses. This is the key verse that says dukkha norodha (cessation of suffering) is the same as vinnana nirodha (cessation of vinnana).

@mikenz66:
Sankhara are one's thoughts. Kaya, vaci, and mano sankhara all arise in the mind. By "generation" I meant arising of thoughts in one's mind. And Sankhara are not feelings.
Parinibbana means "Nibbana is complete". It is the same as anupadisesa Nibbana. It happens when the Arahant passes away.

[DooDoot]

@DooDoot:
You said: "However, the core Dhamma is obviously not found in obscure hidden suttas."

How about the “Maha Nidana Sutta (Digha Nikaya 15)”

Best to stick to SN 12.2 because, in my opinion, the Buddha did not speak DN 15. DN 15 is very different to SN 12.2.

where the Buddha has the following exchange with Ven. Ananda:

"Viññāṇapaccayā nāmarūpan’ti iti kho panetaṃ vuttaṃ, tadānanda, imināpetaṃ pariyāyena veditabbaṃ, yathā viññāṇapaccayā nāmarūpaṃ. Viññāṇañca hi, ānanda, mātukucchismiṃ na okkamissatha, api nu kho nāmarūpaṃ mātukucchismiṃ samuccissathā”ti? “No hetaṃ, bhante”. “Viññāṇañca hi, ānanda, mātukucchismiṃ okkamitvā vokkamissatha, api nu kho nāmarūpaṃ itthattāya abhi­nib­bat­tis­sathā”ti? “No hetaṃ, bhante”. “Viññāṇañca hi, ānanda, daharasseva sato voc­chij­jis­satha kumārakassa vā kumārikāya vā, api nu kho nāmarūpaṃ vuddhiṃ virūḷhiṃ vepullaṃ āpajjissathā”ti? “No hetaṃ, bhante”. “Tasmātihānanda, eseva hetu etaṃ nidānaṃ esa samudayo esa paccayo nāmarūpassa—yadidaṃ viññāṇaṃ.

Here is my English translation:

“It was said: ‘With defiled consciousness (vinnana) as condition there is nāmarūpa (normally translated as mentality-materiality"

How that is so, Ānanda, should be understood in this way: If consciousness (Viññāṇañca) were not to descend (na okkamissatha) into the mother’s womb, would that nāmarūpa take shape in the womb?”

“Certainly not, venerable sir.”

“If, after descending (okkamitvā) into the womb, consciousness were to depart (vokkamissatha), would that nāmarūpa be generated into this present state of being?”

“Certainly not, venerable sir.”

“If the consciousness of a young boy or girl (kumārakassa vā kumārikāya vā) were to be come out, would that nāmarūpa grow up, develop, and reach maturity?”

“Certainly not, venerable sir.”

“Therefore, Ānanda, this is the cause, source, origin, and condition (eseva hetu etaṃ nidānaṃ esa samudayo) for nāmarūpa, namely, defiled consciousness (yadidaṃ viññāṇaṃ).

This is from #7 of my post: "https://puredhamma.net/living-dhamma/na ... ceda-nana/".

How would you or an "excellent Pali grammartarian" translate the above verse?

The above verse is alien to the main suttas on dependent origination.

Explain why "yadidaṃ" mean "defiled"?

If we can continue the discussion without throwing accusations, it will become clear at the end who has wrong views.

Gotama searched for liberation. Liberation must be permanent or nonfluctuating (MN 140). The permanent liberation is the destruction of craving rather than any type of ending of consciousness.

Also, how would you translate the key verse:
"Yaṃ kiñci dukkhaṃ sambhoti,
sabbaṃ saṅ­khā­ra­pac­cayā;
Saṅkhārānaṃ nirodhena,
natthi dukkhassa sambhavo."

Etamādīnavaṃ ñatvā,
dukkhaṃ saṅkhārapaccayā;
Sabbasaṅkhārasamathā,
saññānaṃ uparodhanā;
Evaṃ dukkhakkhayo hoti,
etaṃ ñatvā yathātathaṃ.

Sammaddasā vedaguno,
Sammadaññāya paṇḍitā;
Abhibhuyya mārasaṃyogaṃ,
Na gacchanti punabbhavanti

The above sutta is merely about D.O. It says "sankhara" here is not destroyed but calmed. "With the tranquilizing of all fabrication" - Sabbasaṅkhārasamathā. Its written in the sutta and in many other places. I suggest read all of the sutta rather than pick & choose verses that suit the mind's idiosyncratic views.

"Nirodha" does not appear to literally mean "cessation/destruction".

There is no need to analyze other verses. This is the key verse that says dukkha norodha (cessation of suffering) is the same as vinnana nirodha (cessation of vinnana).

Its appears your ideas about the word "nirodha" are contrary to the suttas. MN 38 describes "nirodha". Based on the sutta below, it seems "nirodha" is not the destruction of consciousness.

On seeing a form with the eye, he does not lust after it if it is pleasing; he does not dislike it if it is unpleasing. He abides with mindfulness of the body established, with an immeasurable mind, and he understands as it actually is the deliverance of mind and deliverance by wisdom wherein those evil unwholesome states cease without remainder. Having thus abandoned favouring and opposing, whatever feeling he feels, whether pleasant or painful or neither-painful-nor-pleasant, he does not delight in that feeling, welcome it, or remain holding to it. As he does not do so, delight in feelings ceases in him. With the cessation of his delight comes cessation of clinging; with the cessation of clinging, cessation of being; with the cessation of being, cessation of birth; with the cessation of birth, ageing and death, sorrow, lamentation, pain, grief, and despair cease. Such is the cessation of this whole mass of suffering.

69“On hearing a sound with the ear…On smelling an odour with the nose…On tasting a flavour with the tongue…On touching a tangible with the body…On cognizing a mind-object with the mind, he does not lust after it if it is pleasing; he does not dislike it if it is unpleasing…With the cessation of his delight comes cessation of clinging; with the cessation of clinging, cessation of being; with the cessation of being, cessation of birth; with the cessation of birth, ageing and death, sorrow, lamentation, pain, grief, and despair cease. Such is the cessation of this whole mass of suffering.

MN 38

[Lal]

@DooDoot:

Writing long replies does not make it any more convincing.
You said: "Best to stick to SN 12.2 because, in my opinion, the Buddha did not speak DN 15."

What in SN 12.2 makes your point? Please quote the verse and give the translation. Furthermore, one cannot pick and choose suttas one likes. All suttas in the Tipitaka are self-consistent. It is only when people start misinterpreting suttas that inconsistencies arise.

You said: "Explain why "yadidaṃ" mean "defiled"? "

Yadidam does not mean "defiled". Yadidam is "yad + idam" or basically, "thus". It is the vinnana that is "defiled consciousness".

- Please read the threads from 2-3 days ago when this discussion started. We have discussed how a pure citta with just the 7 universal cetasika goes through 8 stages in a billionth of a second to get to the contaminated "vinnana" stage, and then is incorporated to the vinnannakkhandha at the 9th stage. When one becomes an Arahant, one stops generating abhisankhara and thus one's vinnana will not be defiled (the evolution of a pure citta only proceeds to the "manasan" stage.

You said: "It says "sankhara" here is not destroyed but calmed."

For an Arahant, sankhara are not stopped. They merely stop becoming abhisankhara. It is those abhisankhara that lead to rebirth. While one is still living, one still need to generate sankhara to move the body, speak, and to think. These are basic facts one MUST learn before analyzing suttas.

You said: "Its appears your ideas about the word "nirodha" are contrary to the suttas. MN 38 describes "nirodha". Based on the sutta below, it seems "nirodha" is not the destruction of consciousness."

Nirodha comes from "nir + uda" or "stop from arising". When abhisankhara stop from arising in one's mind, that is "vinnanna nirodha" and leads to "dukkha nirodha", i.e., stop suffering from arising.
- Vinnana nirodha does not mean "destruction of consciousness". It means consciousness is kept "pure" and will not become defiled. A pure citta will not GET defiled by incorporating "asobhana cetsika" (i.e., prevented from becoming defiled) during its evolution for an Arahant.

Please read the previous threads carefully before responding. I do not want to repeat myself many times. Of course, please point out anything contradictory that I have stated, and I would be happy to respond.
It is important to realize the difference between a pure citta and vinnana. Without that understanding, it is a waste of time to analyze deeper suttas, because one does not even know how suffering arises: "avijja pavvaya sankhara (which really means abhisankhara), sankhara paccaya vinnana, ...."jara, marana, soka, parideva, etc (suffering).

[DooDoot]

Writing long replies does not make it any more convincing.

The above is irrelevant & hypocritical. The Buddha taught to abandon hypocrisy (MN 8).

What in SN 12.2 makes your point?

SN 12.2 refers to the six-fold consciousness, which is found in every sutta related to D.O. except in DN 15.

Please quote the verse and give the translation. Furthermore, one cannot pick and choose suttas one likes.

No. There might be hundreds of suttas that refer to the six-fold consciousness but there is only one sutta with what DN 15 says about consciousness. It is you and not me picking & choosing what one likes.

All suttas in the Tipitaka are self-consistent.

DN 15 is not consistent. Also, if all suttas in the Tipitaka are self-consistent, how could one pick & choose what one likes?

[/b]It is only when people start misinterpreting suttas that inconsistencies arise.

No. It is when @Lal is misinterpreting suttas that inconsistencies arise. DN 15 is inconsistent.

You said: "Explain why "yadidaṃ" mean "defiled"? "

Yadidam does not mean "defiled". Yadidam is "yad + idam" or basically, "thus". It is the vinnana that is "defiled consciousness".

Where does DN 15 refer to a defiled consciousness? Thanks. SN 12.2 refers to a defiled consciousness because SN 12.2 refers to a consciousness that arises from ignorance (defilement). But what about DN 15? Where is defiled consciousness mentioned in DN 15?

- Please read the threads from 2-3 days ago when this discussion started. We have discussed how a pure citta with just the 7 universal cetasika goes through 8 stages in a billionth of a second to get to the contaminated "vinnana" stage, and then is incorporated to the vinnannakkhandha at the 9th stage. When one becomes an Arahant, one stops generating abhisankhara and thus one's vinnana will not be defiled (the evolution of a pure citta only proceeds to the "manasan" stage.

Arahant's vinnana will not be defiled. Sounds reasonable. OK. You wrote one single thing I agree with.

You said: "It says "sankhara" here is not destroyed but calmed."

Snp 3.12 literally says this; as does the definition of Nibbana from MN 26.

For an Arahant, sankhara are not stopped. They merely stop becoming abhisankhara. It is those abhisankhara that lead to rebirth. While one is still living, one still need to generate sankhara to move the body, speak, and to think. These are basic facts one MUST learn before analyzing suttas.

I already posted the above. This does not change the misintepretations made about Snp 3.12.

Nirodha comes from "nir + uda" or "stop from arising".

Please provide evidence for this.

When abhisankhara stop from arising in one's mind, that is "vinnanna nirodha" and leads to "dukkha nirodha", i.e., stop suffering from arising.

Yes. But you previously posted consciousness was the cause of suffering (rather than abhisankhara is the cause of suffering).

- Vinnana nirodha does not mean "destruction of consciousness". It means consciousness is kept "pure" and will not become defiled.

Yes. This is what I posted. But you posted consciousness was the cause of suffering (rather than defilement is the cause of suffering).

A pure citta will not GET defiled by incorporating "asobhana cetsika" (i.e., prevented from becoming defiled) during its evolution for an Arahant.

And? So? This does not change what you posted saying consciousness was the cause of suffering (rather than defilement is the cause of suffering).

It is important to realize the difference between a pure citta and vinnana.

It is important realise the right view of the suttas.

Without that understanding, it is a waste of time to analyze deeper suttas, because one does not even know how suffering arises: "avijja pavvaya sankhara (which really means abhisankhara), sankhara paccaya vinnana, ...."jara, marana, soka, parideva, etc (suffering).

No. In my opinion, vvijja pavvaya sankhara does not really mean abhisankhara. Please refer to SN 12.51, which appears to literally refer to abhisankhara as clinging (upadana).

Since he does not generate or fashion volitional formations, he does not cling to anything in the world. Not clinging, he is not agitated. Not being agitated, he personally attains Nibbāna.

SN 12.51

In SN 12.2, MN 9, etc, vvijja pavvaya sankhara refers to the kaya, vaci & citta sankhara. In MN 44, these three terms are defined as in & out breathing, initial & sustained thought and perception & feeling. This is why SN 12.2 is important (and why DN 15 is incomplete & inconsistent).

[2600htz]

Hello @Lal :

Could you provide some link to a dhamma talk of Ven. Waharaka Abhayaratanalankara Thero with english subtitles?.
This topic seems highly intellectual, so it would be great to see the way he talked to an audience.

Regards.

[Lal]

@2600htz:
I am sorry. But there are no English discourses by the Waharaka Thero or ones with English subtitles. Following is the link to the Waharaka website for those who can understand Sinhala:
https://waharaka.com/

[SarathW]

Vinnana appears only in the mundane or "akusala-mula" paticca samuppada

Actually now I can recall reading that Vinnana in DO should be read as Patisandhi Vinnana.

[2600htz]

@2600htz:
I am sorry. But there are no English discourses by the Waharaka Thero or ones with English subtitles. Following is the link to the Waharaka website for those who can understand Sinhala:
https://waharaka.com/

@Lal

Ohh ok, then i give you that task haha (joking).

Regards.

[Lal]

@SarathW: "Actually now I can recall reading that Vinnana in DO should be read as Patisandhi Vinnana."

That is correct for an "uppatti paticca samuppada" or "DO responsible for generating a new life".

In cases of "pavutti paticca samuppada" or "DO for an event during a lifetime", it is not a "patisandhi vinnana" that comes into play. There are many varieties of vinnana.