The teachings of Ven. Waharaka Abhayaratanalankara Thero

A forum for Dhamma resources in languages other than English
SarathW
Posts: 10183
Joined: Mon Sep 10, 2012 2:49 am

Re: The teachings of Ven. Waharaka Abhayaratanalankara Thero

Post by SarathW » Fri Sep 21, 2018 8:57 am

thang wrote:
Thu Sep 20, 2018 10:00 pm
I have heard from forest and village sangha in Sri Lanka.
The vast majority of sangha's opinion is the following monks are hold strong Micca ditthi.

1. Waharaka Abhayaratanalankara
2. Meevanapalane Siri Saddhammalankara
3. Walasmulle Abhaya
4. Pitiduve Siridhamma/ Siri Samanta Bhadra

Many monks and lay people in Sri Lanka have done even 'Adittana Puja's hoping the miccaditti forces to be defeated.

Printing the books of number (2) monk who is the companion of late (1) monk, have been prohibited by a court order. non English link
Number (3) monk has been expelled by his nikaya as well.The notices of Maha Nayaka thero of his nikaya can be seen on this site (not English)
4. Pitiduve Siridhamma/ Siri Samanta Bhadra
He has given a warning and taken disciplinary action against him.
“As the lamp consumes oil, the path realises Nibbana”

Lal
Posts: 215
Joined: Thu Jun 23, 2016 11:39 am

Re: The teachings of Ven. Waharaka Abhayaratanalankara Thero

Post by Lal » Fri Sep 21, 2018 9:13 am

I hope we can have a rational conversation on this current topic, where we can reach a conclusion. I am going to ignore all useless comments on character assassinations. I don’t have time to defend any other but Waharaka Thero. Everything he has said in his desanas, and what I have written at puredhamma.net, are consistent with the Tipitaka.

Ven. Dhammanando said:
“What is that cognizance? There is cognizance as consciousness due to long in-breaths; ... There is cognizance as consciousness due to short in-breaths; ... [and so on with all the other modes up to] ... There is cognizance as consciousness due to out-breaths tranquillizing the body formation; any cognizance, mind, mentation, heart, lucidity, mind, mind base, mind faculty, consciousness, consciousness aggregate, mind consciousness principle produced by that, is “cognizance.”
What do these terms (in bold) really mean in the context of that verse? (I think SarathW asked for this too).

I have explained them (cittaṃ mano mānasaṃ hadayaṃ paṇḍaraṃ mano manāyatanaṃ manindriyaṃ viññāṇaṃ viññāṇakkhandho) in detail in plain English in my earlier post on September 18, 2018: “Amazingly Fast Time Evolution of a Thought (Citta)”.


Ven. Dhammanando said:
The Paṭisambhidāmagga does mention all of them – just once in the chapter on ānāpānassati. But what little it says offers no support for the Waharaka “nine-stages-in-a-process” theory:…
Actually, those terms are used in many places in Vibhangapakarana. In the https://legacy.suttacentral.net/pi/vb6 section (where multiple paticca samuppada cycles are discussed in the Paticcasamuppada Vibhanga), there are many.

I am quoting in the following a subsection from the https://legacy.suttacentral.net/pi/vb3# ... f-contents section (Dhātuvibhaṅga). It explains how viñ­ñā­ṇa arises when we receive sense inputs via any of the six senses (seeing, hearing, etc):

2. Abhi­dham­ma­bhājanīya
Aṭṭhārasa dhātuyo—cakkhudhātu, rūpadhātu, cak­khu­viñ­ñā­ṇa­dhātu, sotadhātu, saddadhātu, sota­viñ­ñā­ṇa­dhātu, ghānadhātu, gandhadhātu, ghāna­viñ­ñā­ṇa­dhātu, jivhādhātu, rasadhātu, jivhā­viñ­ñā­ṇa­dhātu, kāyadhātu, ­phoṭṭhab­ba­dhātu, kāya­viñ­ñā­ṇa­dhātu, manodhātu, dhammadhātu, mano­viñ­ñā­ṇa­dhātu.

Tattha katamā cakkhudhātu? Yaṃ cakkhu catunnaṃ mahābhūtānaṃ upādāya pasādo … pe … suñño gāmopeso—ayaṃ vuccati “cakkhudhātu”. (1)

Tattha katamā rūpadhātu? Yaṃ rūpaṃ catunnaṃ mahābhūtānaṃ upādāya vaṇṇanibhā … pe … rūpadhātupesā—ayaṃ vuccati “rūpadhātu”. (2)

Tattha katamā cak­khu­viñ­ñā­ṇa­dhātu? Cakkhuñca paṭicca rūpe ca uppajjati cittaṃ mano mānasaṃ hadayaṃ paṇḍaraṃ mano manāyatanaṃ manindriyaṃ viññāṇaṃ viññā­ṇak­khan­dho tajjā­cak­khu­viñ­ñā­ṇa­dhātu—ayaṃ vuccati “cak­khu­viñ­ñā­ṇa­dhātu”. (3)

Tattha katamā sotadhātu? Yaṃ sotaṃ catunnaṃ mahābhūtānaṃ upādāya pasādo … pe … suñño gāmopeso—ayaṃ vuccati “sotadhātu”. (4)

Tattha katamā saddadhātu? Yo saddo catunnaṃ mahābhūtānaṃ upādāya anidassano sappaṭigho … pe … saddadhātupesā—ayaṃ vuccati “saddadhātu”. (5)

Tattha katamā sota­viñ­ñā­ṇa­dhātu? Sotañca paṭicca sadde ca uppajjati cittaṃ mano mānasaṃ hadayaṃ paṇḍaraṃ mano manāyatanaṃ manindriyaṃ viññāṇaṃ viññā­ṇak­khan­dho tajjā­sota­viñ­ñā­ṇa­dhātu—ayaṃ vuccati “sota­viñ­ñā­ṇa­dhātu”. (6)

Tattha katamā ghānadhātu? Yaṃ ghānaṃ catunnaṃ mahābhūtānaṃ upādāya pasādo … pe … suñño gāmopeso—ayaṃ vuccati “ghānadhātu”. (7)

Tattha katamā gandhadhātu? Yo gandho catunnaṃ mahābhūtānaṃ upādāya anidassano sappaṭigho … pe … gandha­dhātu­pesā—ayaṃ vuccati “gandhadhātu”. (8)

Tattha katamā ghāna­viñ­ñā­ṇa­dhātu? Ghānañca paṭicca gandhe ca uppajjati cittaṃ mano mānasaṃ hadayaṃ paṇḍaraṃ mano manāyatanaṃ manindriyaṃ viññāṇaṃ viññā­ṇak­khan­dho tajjā­ghāna­viñ­ñā­ṇa­dhātu—ayaṃ vuccati “ghāna­viñ­ñā­ṇa­dhātu”. (9)

Tattha katamā jivhādhātu? Yā jivhā catunnaṃ mahābhūtānaṃ upādāya pasādo … pe … suñño gāmopeso—ayaṃ vuccati “jivhādhātu”. (10)

Tattha katamā rasadhātu? Yo raso catunnaṃ mahābhūtānaṃ upādāya anidassano sappaṭigho … pe … rasadhātupesā—ayaṃ vuccati “rasadhātu”. (11)

Tattha katamā jivhā­viñ­ñā­ṇa­dhātu? Jivhañca paṭicca rase ca uppajjati cittaṃ mano mānasaṃ hadayaṃ paṇḍaraṃ mano manāyatanaṃ manindriyaṃ viññāṇaṃ viññā­ṇak­khan­dho tajjā­jivhā­viñ­ñā­ṇa­dhātu—ayaṃ vuccati “jivhā­viñ­ñā­ṇa­dhātu”. (12)

Tattha katamā kāyadhātu? Yo kāyo catunnaṃ mahābhūtānaṃ upādāya pasādo … pe … suñño gāmopeso—ayaṃ vuccati “kāyadhātu”. (13)

Tattha katamā ­phoṭṭhab­ba­dhātu? Pathavīdhātu … pe … ­phoṭṭhab­ba­dhātu­pesā—ayaṃ vuccati “­phoṭṭhab­ba­dhātu”. (14)

Tattha katamā kāya­viñ­ñā­ṇa­dhātu? Kāyañca paṭicca phoṭṭhabbe ca uppajjati cittaṃ mano mānasaṃ hadayaṃ paṇḍaraṃ mano manāyatanaṃ manindriyaṃ viññāṇaṃ viññā­ṇak­khan­dho tajjā­kāya­viñ­ñā­ṇa­dhātu—ayaṃ vuccati “kāya­viñ­ñā­ṇa­dhātu”. (15)

Tattha katamā manodhātu? Cak­khu­viñ­ñā­ṇa­dhātuyā uppajjitvā nirud­dhasama­nan­tarā uppajjati cittaṃ mano mānasaṃ hadayaṃ paṇḍaraṃ mano manāyatanaṃ manindriyaṃ viññāṇaṃ viññā­ṇak­khan­dho tajjāmanodhātu; sota­viñ­ñā­ṇa­dhātuyā … pe … ghāna­viñ­ñā­ṇa­dhātuyā … pe … jivhā­viñ­ñā­ṇa­dhātuyā … pe … kāya­viñ­ñā­ṇa­dhātuyā uppajjitvā nirud­dhasama­nan­tarā uppajjati cittaṃ mano mānasaṃ hadayaṃ paṇḍaraṃ mano manāyatanaṃ manindriyaṃ viññāṇaṃ viññā­ṇak­khan­dho tajjāmanodhātu sabbadhammesu vā pana paṭha­ma­saman­nā­hāro uppajjati cittaṃ mano mānasaṃ hadayaṃ paṇḍaraṃ mano manāyatanaṃ manindriyaṃ viññāṇaṃ viññā­ṇak­khan­dho tajjāmanodhātu—ayaṃ vuccati “manodhātu”. (16)

Tattha katamā dhammadhātu? Vedanākkhandho, saññākkhandho, saṅ­khā­rak­khan­dho, yañca rūpaṃ ani­dassa­na­ap­paṭi­ghaṃ dhammā­yatana­pariyā­pannaṃ, asaṅkhatā ca dhātu.

Tattha katamo vedanākkhandho? Ekavidhena vedanākkhandho—­phassasam­payutto. Duvidhena vedanākkhandho—atthi sahetuko, atthi ahetuko. Tividhena vedanākkhandho—atthi kusalo, atthi akusalo, atthi abyākato … pe … evaṃ dasavidhena vedanākkhandho … pe … evaṃ bahuvidhena vedanākkhandho. Ayaṃ vuccati “vedanākkhandho”. (1)

Tattha katamo saññākkhandho? Ekavidhena saññākkhandho—­phassasam­payutto. Duvidhena saññākkhandho—atthi sahetuko, atthi ahetuko. Tividhena saññākkhandho—atthi kusalo, atthi akusalo, atthi abyākato … pe … evaṃ dasavidhena saññākkhandho … pe … evaṃ bahuvidhena saññākkhandho. Ayaṃ vuccati “saññākkhandho”. (2)

Tattha katamo saṅ­khā­rak­khan­dho? Ekavidhena saṅ­khā­rak­khan­dho—citta­sam­payutto. Duvidhena saṅ­khā­rak­khan­dho—atthi hetu, atthi ahetu. Tividhena saṅ­khā­rak­khan­dho—atthi kusalo, atthi akusalo, atthi abyākato … pe … evaṃ dasavidhena saṅ­khā­rak­khan­dho … pe … evaṃ bahuvidhena saṅ­khā­rak­khan­dho—ayaṃ vuccati “saṅ­khā­rak­khan­dho”. (3)

Tattha katamaṃ rūpaṃ ani­dassa­na­ap­paṭi­ghaṃ dhammā­yatana­pariyā­pannaṃ? Itthindriyaṃ … pe … kabaḷīkāro āhāro—idaṃ vuccati rūpaṃ “ani­dassa­na­ap­paṭi­ghaṃ dhammā­yatana­pariyā­pannaṃ”. (4)

Tattha katamā asaṅkhatā dhātu? Rāgakkhayo, dosakkhayo, mohakkhayo—ayaṃ vuccati “asaṅkhatā dhātu”. Ayaṃ vuccati “dhammadhātu”. (5–‍17)

Tattha katamā mano­viñ­ñā­ṇa­dhātu? Cak­khu­viñ­ñā­ṇa­dhātuyā uppajjitvā nirud­dhasama­nan­tarā uppajjati manodhātu, manodhātuyā uppajjitvā nirud­dhasama­nan­tarā uppajjati cittaṃ mano mānasaṃ … pe … tajjā­mano­viñ­ñā­ṇa­dhātu; sota­viñ­ñā­ṇa­dhātuyā … pe … ghāna­viñ­ñā­ṇa­dhātuyā … pe … jivhā­viñ­ñā­ṇa­dhātuyā … pe … kāya­viñ­ñā­ṇa­dhātuyā uppajjitvā nirud­dhasama­nan­tarā uppajjati manodhātu, manodhātuyāpi uppajjitvā nirud­dhasama­nan­tarā uppajjati cittaṃ mano mānasaṃ … pe … tajjā­mano­viñ­ñā­ṇa­dhātu manañca paṭicca dhamme ca uppajjati cittaṃ mano mānasaṃ hadayaṃ paṇḍaraṃ mano manāyatanaṃ manindriyaṃ viññāṇaṃ viññā­ṇak­khan­dho tajjā­mano­viñ­ñā­ṇa­dhātu—ayaṃ vuccati “mano­viñ­ñā­ṇa­dhātu”.
(18)

Ryan95227
Posts: 68
Joined: Fri Jan 30, 2015 3:29 am

Re: The teachings of Ven. Waharaka Abhayaratanalankara Thero

Post by Ryan95227 » Fri Sep 21, 2018 11:28 am

Lal wrote:
Fri Sep 21, 2018 9:13 am
I hope we can have a rational conversation on this current topic, where we can reach a conclusion. I am going to ignore all useless comments on character assassinations. I don’t have time to defend any other but Waharaka Thero. Everything he has said in his desanas, and what I have written at puredhamma.net, are consistent with the Tipitaka.

Ven. Dhammanando said:
“What is that cognizance? There is cognizance as consciousness due to long in-breaths; ... There is cognizance as consciousness due to short in-breaths; ... [and so on with all the other modes up to] ... There is cognizance as consciousness due to out-breaths tranquillizing the body formation; any cognizance, mind, mentation, heart, lucidity, mind, mind base, mind faculty, consciousness, consciousness aggregate, mind consciousness principle produced by that, is “cognizance.”
What do these terms (in bold) really mean in the context of that verse? (I think SarathW asked for this too).

I have explained them (cittaṃ mano mānasaṃ hadayaṃ paṇḍaraṃ mano manāyatanaṃ manindriyaṃ viññāṇaṃ viññāṇakkhandho) in detail in plain English in my earlier post on September 18, 2018: “Amazingly Fast Time Evolution of a Thought (Citta)”.


Ven. Dhammanando said:
The Paṭisambhidāmagga does mention all of them – just once in the chapter on ānāpānassati. But what little it says offers no support for the Waharaka “nine-stages-in-a-process” theory:…
Actually, those terms are used in many places in Vibhangapakarana. In the https://legacy.suttacentral.net/pi/vb6 section (where multiple paticca samuppada cycles are discussed in the Paticcasamuppada Vibhanga), there are many.

I am quoting in the following a subsection from the https://legacy.suttacentral.net/pi/vb3# ... f-contents section (Dhātuvibhaṅga). It explains how viñ­ñā­ṇa arises when we receive sense inputs via any of the six senses (seeing, hearing, etc):

2. Abhi­dham­ma­bhājanīya
Aṭṭhārasa dhātuyo—cakkhudhātu, rūpadhātu, cak­khu­viñ­ñā­ṇa­dhātu, sotadhātu, saddadhātu, sota­viñ­ñā­ṇa­dhātu, ghānadhātu, gandhadhātu, ghāna­viñ­ñā­ṇa­dhātu, jivhādhātu, rasadhātu, jivhā­viñ­ñā­ṇa­dhātu, kāyadhātu, ­phoṭṭhab­ba­dhātu, kāya­viñ­ñā­ṇa­dhātu, manodhātu, dhammadhātu, mano­viñ­ñā­ṇa­dhātu.

Tattha katamā cakkhudhātu? Yaṃ cakkhu catunnaṃ mahābhūtānaṃ upādāya pasādo … pe … suñño gāmopeso—ayaṃ vuccati “cakkhudhātu”. (1)

Tattha katamā rūpadhātu? Yaṃ rūpaṃ catunnaṃ mahābhūtānaṃ upādāya vaṇṇanibhā … pe … rūpadhātupesā—ayaṃ vuccati “rūpadhātu”. (2)

Tattha katamā cak­khu­viñ­ñā­ṇa­dhātu? Cakkhuñca paṭicca rūpe ca uppajjati cittaṃ mano mānasaṃ hadayaṃ paṇḍaraṃ mano manāyatanaṃ manindriyaṃ viññāṇaṃ viññā­ṇak­khan­dho tajjā­cak­khu­viñ­ñā­ṇa­dhātu—ayaṃ vuccati “cak­khu­viñ­ñā­ṇa­dhātu”. (3)

Tattha katamā sotadhātu? Yaṃ sotaṃ catunnaṃ mahābhūtānaṃ upādāya pasādo … pe … suñño gāmopeso—ayaṃ vuccati “sotadhātu”. (4)

Tattha katamā saddadhātu? Yo saddo catunnaṃ mahābhūtānaṃ upādāya anidassano sappaṭigho … pe … saddadhātupesā—ayaṃ vuccati “saddadhātu”. (5)

Tattha katamā sota­viñ­ñā­ṇa­dhātu? Sotañca paṭicca sadde ca uppajjati cittaṃ mano mānasaṃ hadayaṃ paṇḍaraṃ mano manāyatanaṃ manindriyaṃ viññāṇaṃ viññā­ṇak­khan­dho tajjā­sota­viñ­ñā­ṇa­dhātu—ayaṃ vuccati “sota­viñ­ñā­ṇa­dhātu”. (6)

Tattha katamā ghānadhātu? Yaṃ ghānaṃ catunnaṃ mahābhūtānaṃ upādāya pasādo … pe … suñño gāmopeso—ayaṃ vuccati “ghānadhātu”. (7)

Tattha katamā gandhadhātu? Yo gandho catunnaṃ mahābhūtānaṃ upādāya anidassano sappaṭigho … pe … gandha­dhātu­pesā—ayaṃ vuccati “gandhadhātu”. (8)

Tattha katamā ghāna­viñ­ñā­ṇa­dhātu? Ghānañca paṭicca gandhe ca uppajjati cittaṃ mano mānasaṃ hadayaṃ paṇḍaraṃ mano manāyatanaṃ manindriyaṃ viññāṇaṃ viññā­ṇak­khan­dho tajjā­ghāna­viñ­ñā­ṇa­dhātu—ayaṃ vuccati “ghāna­viñ­ñā­ṇa­dhātu”. (9)

Tattha katamā jivhādhātu? Yā jivhā catunnaṃ mahābhūtānaṃ upādāya pasādo … pe … suñño gāmopeso—ayaṃ vuccati “jivhādhātu”. (10)

Tattha katamā rasadhātu? Yo raso catunnaṃ mahābhūtānaṃ upādāya anidassano sappaṭigho … pe … rasadhātupesā—ayaṃ vuccati “rasadhātu”. (11)

Tattha katamā jivhā­viñ­ñā­ṇa­dhātu? Jivhañca paṭicca rase ca uppajjati cittaṃ mano mānasaṃ hadayaṃ paṇḍaraṃ mano manāyatanaṃ manindriyaṃ viññāṇaṃ viññā­ṇak­khan­dho tajjā­jivhā­viñ­ñā­ṇa­dhātu—ayaṃ vuccati “jivhā­viñ­ñā­ṇa­dhātu”. (12)

Tattha katamā kāyadhātu? Yo kāyo catunnaṃ mahābhūtānaṃ upādāya pasādo … pe … suñño gāmopeso—ayaṃ vuccati “kāyadhātu”. (13)

Tattha katamā ­phoṭṭhab­ba­dhātu? Pathavīdhātu … pe … ­phoṭṭhab­ba­dhātu­pesā—ayaṃ vuccati “­phoṭṭhab­ba­dhātu”. (14)

Tattha katamā kāya­viñ­ñā­ṇa­dhātu? Kāyañca paṭicca phoṭṭhabbe ca uppajjati cittaṃ mano mānasaṃ hadayaṃ paṇḍaraṃ mano manāyatanaṃ manindriyaṃ viññāṇaṃ viññā­ṇak­khan­dho tajjā­kāya­viñ­ñā­ṇa­dhātu—ayaṃ vuccati “kāya­viñ­ñā­ṇa­dhātu”. (15)

Tattha katamā manodhātu? Cak­khu­viñ­ñā­ṇa­dhātuyā uppajjitvā nirud­dhasama­nan­tarā uppajjati cittaṃ mano mānasaṃ hadayaṃ paṇḍaraṃ mano manāyatanaṃ manindriyaṃ viññāṇaṃ viññā­ṇak­khan­dho tajjāmanodhātu; sota­viñ­ñā­ṇa­dhātuyā … pe … ghāna­viñ­ñā­ṇa­dhātuyā … pe … jivhā­viñ­ñā­ṇa­dhātuyā … pe … kāya­viñ­ñā­ṇa­dhātuyā uppajjitvā nirud­dhasama­nan­tarā uppajjati cittaṃ mano mānasaṃ hadayaṃ paṇḍaraṃ mano manāyatanaṃ manindriyaṃ viññāṇaṃ viññā­ṇak­khan­dho tajjāmanodhātu sabbadhammesu vā pana paṭha­ma­saman­nā­hāro uppajjati cittaṃ mano mānasaṃ hadayaṃ paṇḍaraṃ mano manāyatanaṃ manindriyaṃ viññāṇaṃ viññā­ṇak­khan­dho tajjāmanodhātu—ayaṃ vuccati “manodhātu”. (16)

Tattha katamā dhammadhātu? Vedanākkhandho, saññākkhandho, saṅ­khā­rak­khan­dho, yañca rūpaṃ ani­dassa­na­ap­paṭi­ghaṃ dhammā­yatana­pariyā­pannaṃ, asaṅkhatā ca dhātu.

Tattha katamo vedanākkhandho? Ekavidhena vedanākkhandho—­phassasam­payutto. Duvidhena vedanākkhandho—atthi sahetuko, atthi ahetuko. Tividhena vedanākkhandho—atthi kusalo, atthi akusalo, atthi abyākato … pe … evaṃ dasavidhena vedanākkhandho … pe … evaṃ bahuvidhena vedanākkhandho. Ayaṃ vuccati “vedanākkhandho”. (1)

Tattha katamo saññākkhandho? Ekavidhena saññākkhandho—­phassasam­payutto. Duvidhena saññākkhandho—atthi sahetuko, atthi ahetuko. Tividhena saññākkhandho—atthi kusalo, atthi akusalo, atthi abyākato … pe … evaṃ dasavidhena saññākkhandho … pe … evaṃ bahuvidhena saññākkhandho. Ayaṃ vuccati “saññākkhandho”. (2)

Tattha katamo saṅ­khā­rak­khan­dho? Ekavidhena saṅ­khā­rak­khan­dho—citta­sam­payutto. Duvidhena saṅ­khā­rak­khan­dho—atthi hetu, atthi ahetu. Tividhena saṅ­khā­rak­khan­dho—atthi kusalo, atthi akusalo, atthi abyākato … pe … evaṃ dasavidhena saṅ­khā­rak­khan­dho … pe … evaṃ bahuvidhena saṅ­khā­rak­khan­dho—ayaṃ vuccati “saṅ­khā­rak­khan­dho”. (3)

Tattha katamaṃ rūpaṃ ani­dassa­na­ap­paṭi­ghaṃ dhammā­yatana­pariyā­pannaṃ? Itthindriyaṃ … pe … kabaḷīkāro āhāro—idaṃ vuccati rūpaṃ “ani­dassa­na­ap­paṭi­ghaṃ dhammā­yatana­pariyā­pannaṃ”. (4)

Tattha katamā asaṅkhatā dhātu? Rāgakkhayo, dosakkhayo, mohakkhayo—ayaṃ vuccati “asaṅkhatā dhātu”. Ayaṃ vuccati “dhammadhātu”. (5–‍17)

Tattha katamā mano­viñ­ñā­ṇa­dhātu? Cak­khu­viñ­ñā­ṇa­dhātuyā uppajjitvā nirud­dhasama­nan­tarā uppajjati manodhātu, manodhātuyā uppajjitvā nirud­dhasama­nan­tarā uppajjati cittaṃ mano mānasaṃ … pe … tajjā­mano­viñ­ñā­ṇa­dhātu; sota­viñ­ñā­ṇa­dhātuyā … pe … ghāna­viñ­ñā­ṇa­dhātuyā … pe … jivhā­viñ­ñā­ṇa­dhātuyā … pe … kāya­viñ­ñā­ṇa­dhātuyā uppajjitvā nirud­dhasama­nan­tarā uppajjati manodhātu, manodhātuyāpi uppajjitvā nirud­dhasama­nan­tarā uppajjati cittaṃ mano mānasaṃ … pe … tajjā­mano­viñ­ñā­ṇa­dhātu manañca paṭicca dhamme ca uppajjati cittaṃ mano mānasaṃ hadayaṃ paṇḍaraṃ mano manāyatanaṃ manindriyaṃ viññāṇaṃ viññā­ṇak­khan­dho tajjā­mano­viñ­ñā­ṇa­dhātu—ayaṃ vuccati “mano­viñ­ñā­ṇa­dhātu”.
(18)
I've been meaning to ask you this. What makes you believe so much in this monk? Personally, I have followed some teachings on puredhamma and satipatthana has been life changing. I have practiced other form of buddhism over the years and they have honestly never done anything for me (theravada, little bit of zen, and etc). I do have some doubt as formal meditation has been very lackluster according to your ways of meditation and all these people have tried to disprove you and you seem to twist some facts to fit your narrative. I really want to know as a guy who is really looking to see what buddha truly taught. What makes you so "attached" to this teaching that you literally built puredhamma and working so hard to disprove these people even with annoyance? This thread has shaken up my faith in puredhamma tbh.

thang
Posts: 95
Joined: Sat Sep 08, 2018 10:37 pm

Re: The teachings of Ven. Waharaka Abhayaratanalankara Thero

Post by thang » Fri Sep 21, 2018 11:42 am

General opinion of the majority of Sri Lankan Sangha is this: (As I have heard)

1. Waharaka Abhayaratanalankara
2. Meevanapalane Siri Saddhammalankara
3. Walasmulle Abhaya
4. Pitiduve Siridhamma/ Siri Samanta Bhadra

"Above mentioned monks are cunning or have miccaditti. They are disobedient to the sangha. Because the general public doesn't have a good Sutta or Pali knowledge, they deceit or seduce people using fabricated Pali meanings and wrong Sutta explanations."
"Bhikkhus, whatever the Tathāgata speaks, utters, or expounds
in the interval between
the night when he awakens to the unsurpassed perfect enlightenment
and the night when he attains final nibbāna,
all that is just so and not otherwise"
;

User avatar
Dhammanando
Posts: 4209
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 10:44 pm
Location: Ban Sri Pradu Rubber Forest, Phrao, Chiangmai

Re: The teachings of Ven. Waharaka Abhayaratanalankara Thero

Post by Dhammanando » Fri Sep 21, 2018 1:41 pm

Lal wrote:
Fri Sep 21, 2018 9:13 am
Actually, those terms are used in many places in Vibhangapakarana.
I'm actually already familiar with all the canonical texts in which the ten terms (not nine!) are used.

I was replying, however, to your earlier claim that the said terms are: "...discussed in detail mostly in the three commentaries included in the Tipitaka: Patisambhidamagga, Petakopadesa, and Nettippakarana."

But they are not! They are not even briefly discussed in these texts. Moreover, in no Pali text whatever are the terms ever expounded in a manner that lends any support to your teacher's "nine-stages-in-a-citta's-life" theory. In all texts that expound the terms in detail they are treated as synonyms.

User avatar
StormBorn
Posts: 148
Joined: Fri Jun 15, 2018 1:31 pm

Re: The teachings of Ven. Waharaka Abhayaratanalankara Thero

Post by StormBorn » Fri Sep 21, 2018 3:16 pm

Lal wrote:
Fri Sep 21, 2018 9:13 am
I don’t have time to defend any other but Waharaka Thero. Everything he has said in his desanas, and what I have written at puredhamma.net, are consistent with the Tipitaka.
Great! Then, can you give Tipitaka reference/s for the two underlined remarks from Waharaka Thero (below quoted)? Namely, (1)Killing for the country is less unwholesome. and (2)Those soldiers will be reborn as "lokapala devas".
Thank you.
SarathW wrote:
Sun Jun 19, 2016 7:39 am
Very controversial teaching from Ven. A
He says the men who are involve with protecting and law enforcement of masses may involve with killing and torcher the enemies etc.
Killing and torcher is an unwholesome act however it is less unwholesome due to the wholesome intent.
It appears these law enforcement men will be re-born as world protecting Devas. (Lokapala Deva)
So becoming a law enforcement officer is not that bad as far as you act on right intent. :shrug:

http://www.waharaka.com/deshana/listen. ... d=CD097-33" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
“Greater in battle than the man who would conquer a thousand-thousand men, is he who would conquer just one—himself.”

Lal
Posts: 215
Joined: Thu Jun 23, 2016 11:39 am

Re: The teachings of Ven. Waharaka Abhayaratanalankara Thero

Post by Lal » Fri Sep 21, 2018 3:47 pm

Ryan95227 said:
What makes you believe so much in this monk? Personally, I have followed some teachings on puredhamma and satipatthana has been life changing. I have practiced other form of buddhism over the years and they have honestly never done anything for me (theravada, little bit of zen, and etc). I do have some doubt as formal meditation has been very lackluster according to your ways of meditation and all these people have tried to disprove you and you seem to twist some facts to fit your narrative. I really want to know as a guy who is really looking to see what buddha truly taught. What makes you so "attached" to this teaching that you literally built puredhamma and working so hard to disprove these people even with annoyance?
I do this because I have made progress on the Path. This is not just academic for me. I would like at least a few people to see through the truth.
- Of course, those who do not want to learn the truth OR think that all what I say is wrong, can simply not read my posts ( I do not include you in this case). I am not trying persuade anyone who does not want to listen and evaluate.
- The Buddha said trying to persuade those who don't have any interest is a lowly thing to do, just like pursuing a woman who has said "no".

Ven. Dhammanando said:
I'm actually already familiar with all the canonical texts in which the ten terms (not nine!) are used.
OK. Great. Then please explain those terms.

StormBorn said:
Great! Then, can you give Tipitaka reference/s for the two underlined remarks from Waharaka Thero (below quoted)? Namely, (1)Killing for the country is less unwholesome. and (2)Those soldiers will be reborn as "lokapala devas".
Thank you.
SarathW wrote: ↑Sun Jun 19, 2016 7:39 am
Very controversial teaching from Ven. A
He says the men who are involve with protecting and law enforcement of masses may involve with killing and torcher the enemies etc.
Killing and torcher is an unwholesome act however it is less unwholesome due to the wholesome intent.
It appears these law enforcement men will be re-born as world protecting Devas. (Lokapala Deva)
So becoming a law enforcement officer is not that bad as far as you act on right intent. :shrug:
I have previously replied that statement by SarathW. It distorted what the Thero said in the desana. The Thero never said anything like that, and would never say anything like that.
Last edited by Lal on Fri Sep 21, 2018 4:13 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
rightviewftw
Posts: 1975
Joined: Mon Jan 01, 2018 8:50 pm

Re: The teachings of Ven. Waharaka Abhayaratanalankara Thero

Post by rightviewftw » Fri Sep 21, 2018 3:48 pm

Lal wrote:
Fri Jun 29, 2018 2:11 am
What we really experience is really vinnannakkhandha, and even then only after many of them run through our minds.
As i understand the Dhamma If one was to describe reality as a one-fold occurrence as per your question it would be Contact not Vinnana nor Vinnanakhanda. The element of consciousness is merely postulated as a requisite condition for the occurrence of contact.
“There are, Ānanda, these eighteen elements: the eye element, the form element, the eye-consciousness element; the ear element, the sound element, the ear-consciousness element; the nose element, the odor element, the nose-consciousness element; the tongue element, the flavor element, the tongue-consciousness element; the body element, the tangible element, the body-consciousness element; the mind element, the mind-object element, the mind-consciousness element. When he knows and sees these eighteen elements, a bhikkhu can be called skilled in the elements.”
https://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitak ... .than.html
...
"Dependent on eye & forms, eye-consciousness arises. The meeting of the three is contact. With contact as a requisite condition, there is feeling. What one feels, one perceives. What one perceives, one thinks about.
Contact is what occurs, with the occurrence of contact Vinnana can be delineated and classified by 6 types, ear-consciousness, eye-consciousness, nose-consciousness, tongue-consciousness, ideation-consciousness, body-consciousness and these 6 when taken together are the heap of consciousness, the Aggregate Consciousness, Consciousness Cluster, a group made up of types of consciousnesses.
"Whatever consciousness is past, future, or present; internal or external; blatant or subtle; common or sublime; far or near: That is called the consciousness aggregate.
If one says that Vinnanakhanda is what we really experience that is nonsensical because obviously we are not always experiencing all 6 types of consciousness simultaneously. So the statement itself is 100% falsifiable in the here and now

If one was to say Vinnanakhanda (or Vinnana) is what we experience then why not say it is all Sanna[/+khanda] or Vedana[/+khanda] or better yet why isn't Sankhara[/+khanda] the chief, what makes Vinnanakhanda so special and how is one chief when they are conjoined not disjoined?
https://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitak ... .than.html
...
"Now, when there is the eye, when there are forms, when there is eye-consciousness, it is possible that one will delineate a delineation of contact.[1] When there is a delineation of contact, it is possible that one will delineate a delineation of feeling. When there is a delineation of feeling, it is possible that one will delineate a delineation of perception.
"Feeling, perception, & consciousness are conjoined, friend, not disjoined. It is not possible, having separated them one from another, to delineate the difference among them. For what one feels, that one perceives. What one perceives, that one cognizes. Therefore these qualities are conjoined, not disjoined, and it is not possible, having separated them one from another, to delineate the difference among them."
I also wonder what progress you have made in your training and what makes you esteem the nature of that progress to be sufficient to determine that those teachings are true in their entirety and the status of your teacher?
He goes to Niraya, the one who asserts what didn't take place, as does the one who, having done, says, 'I didn't.' Both — low-acting people — there become equal: after death, in the world beyond.
Tyranny of Words - An Introduction to General Semantics
How to Meditate: Mindfulness of Breathing
Factors of Enlightenment & Perceptions
How to Meditate: Basic Satipatthana
Parallel Dhammapada Reading

Lal
Posts: 215
Joined: Thu Jun 23, 2016 11:39 am

Re: The teachings of Ven. Waharaka Abhayaratanalankara Thero

Post by Lal » Fri Sep 21, 2018 7:34 pm

rightviewftw said:
As i understand the Dhamma If one was to describe reality as a one-fold occurrence as per your question it would be Contact not Vinnana nor Vinnanakhanda. The element of consciousness is merely postulated as a requisite condition for the occurrence of contact.
I feel at a loss of words here. I do not mean to offend you, but you have a lot to learn about the basics. There is no other way to say it.

There is a rupa out there. It comes in as an image captured by the eyes. Then it makes CONTACT with the cakkhu indriya. That gives rise to cakkhu vinnana. This is what is stated in, “cakkhunca paticca rupeca uppaddati cakkhu vinnanam”. That “making contact” is what is meant by “cakkhunca paticca rupeca”.

This is the problem with translating deep suttas word-by-word. The true meanings are lost.

Of course some suttas (mostly those in the Digha Nikaya) can be translated word-by-word. But deeper suttas REQUIRE more explanations. Some suttas are only two pages and some are just a single verse. There is a lot of information embedded in them.

Again, please forgive me for being so direct. But there is no other way to say it. I hope you will carefully read my earlier posts on sanna and vinnana, and then the subsequent post on how fast a citta can change.
- Of course, it is entirely up to you to do that or to disregard what I wrote.

User avatar
rightviewftw
Posts: 1975
Joined: Mon Jan 01, 2018 8:50 pm

Re: The teachings of Ven. Waharaka Abhayaratanalankara Thero

Post by rightviewftw » Fri Sep 21, 2018 7:37 pm

Lal wrote:
Fri Sep 21, 2018 7:34 pm
There is a rupa out there.
Where is this "out there"?
Lal wrote:
Fri Sep 21, 2018 7:34 pm
There is a rupa out there. It comes in as an image captured by the eyes.
sutta references that support these statements do not exist.

Looks like i have a lot to learn about the basics of Lalism indeed
Last edited by rightviewftw on Fri Sep 21, 2018 7:52 pm, edited 1 time in total.
He goes to Niraya, the one who asserts what didn't take place, as does the one who, having done, says, 'I didn't.' Both — low-acting people — there become equal: after death, in the world beyond.
Tyranny of Words - An Introduction to General Semantics
How to Meditate: Mindfulness of Breathing
Factors of Enlightenment & Perceptions
How to Meditate: Basic Satipatthana
Parallel Dhammapada Reading

Lal
Posts: 215
Joined: Thu Jun 23, 2016 11:39 am

Re: The teachings of Ven. Waharaka Abhayaratanalankara Thero

Post by Lal » Fri Sep 21, 2018 7:50 pm

Out there means it is outside one's body. When you see a tree, or a person, it is out there.

Are you serious about providing sutta references for that??

User avatar
rightviewftw
Posts: 1975
Joined: Mon Jan 01, 2018 8:50 pm

Re: The teachings of Ven. Waharaka Abhayaratanalankara Thero

Post by rightviewftw » Fri Sep 21, 2018 7:55 pm

Lal wrote:
Fri Sep 21, 2018 7:50 pm
Out there means it is outside one's body. When you see a tree, or a person, it is out there.

Are you serious about providing sutta references for that??
yes because this is the thinking of what is referred to as direct realism which is established to be false view in the world. Id bet your views can be disproven by experimental physics so there is no need to discuss Buddhism even. Quantum Entanglement, Double Slit Experiment and Non-Locality is all it takes to dismiss your ideas. These are facts and if Buddhism was contradicting the quantum experiments it would be dismissed long time ago. Here to start unpacking the terms;

If something contradicts your understanding the problem might just be with your understanding rather than the translations.

I guess you won't understand what i am saying here but it is not my job to explain things to you.

Instead of saying i am wrong because you don't agree with me and that you are by default right which makes me automatically wrong, how about you actually choke up some direct sutta statements supporting those statements you made or at least find some that contradict me! I will accept meaning that can be inferred or direct Sutta quotes but saying that i am wrong because you are right is kind of silly.
He goes to Niraya, the one who asserts what didn't take place, as does the one who, having done, says, 'I didn't.' Both — low-acting people — there become equal: after death, in the world beyond.
Tyranny of Words - An Introduction to General Semantics
How to Meditate: Mindfulness of Breathing
Factors of Enlightenment & Perceptions
How to Meditate: Basic Satipatthana
Parallel Dhammapada Reading

Lal
Posts: 215
Joined: Thu Jun 23, 2016 11:39 am

Re: The teachings of Ven. Waharaka Abhayaratanalankara Thero

Post by Lal » Fri Sep 21, 2018 8:36 pm

@rightviewftw:

I am a physicist, and I know about Quantum Entanglement, Double Slit Experiment and Non-Locality.
I have discussed them at the website:
https://puredhamma.net/difference-betwe ... d-science/

AND

https://puredhamma.net/quantum-mechanic ... ha-dhamma/

User avatar
rightviewftw
Posts: 1975
Joined: Mon Jan 01, 2018 8:50 pm

Re: The teachings of Ven. Waharaka Abhayaratanalankara Thero

Post by rightviewftw » Fri Sep 21, 2018 8:45 pm

Lal wrote:
Fri Sep 21, 2018 8:36 pm
I am a physicist
Classical physics i guess, Newtonian Mechanics?
Anyway i dont have much more to say but i will leave you with this;
https://puredhamma.net/dhamma/our-two-w ... nd-mental/
3. Our “human world” is made of two types of worlds: Material world (living beings and inert objects, sounds, smells, tastes, and body touches) that we experience with the five physical senses and the mental world (dhamma, which includes concepts, memories, etc in addition to kamma beeja with energy) that we experience with our minds.
Lal wrote:
Fri Sep 21, 2018 7:34 pm
There is a rupa out there. It comes in as an image captured by the eyes.
Lal wrote:
Fri Sep 21, 2018 7:50 pm
Out there means it is outside one's body. When you see a tree, or a person, it is out there.
Refutation;
https://suttacentral.net/sn35.116/en/sujato
Whatever in the world through which you perceive the world and conceive the world is called the world in the training of the noble one. And through what in the world do you perceive the world and conceive the world? Through the eye in the world you perceive the world and conceive the world. Through the ear … nose … tongue … body … mind in the world you perceive the world and conceive the world. Whatever in the world through which you perceive the world and conceive the world is called the world in the training of the noble one.
The Blessed One said: "And what is the origination of the world? Dependent on the eye & forms there arises eye-consciousness. The meeting of the three is contact. From contact as a requisite condition comes feeling. From feeling as a requisite condition comes craving. From craving as a requisite condition comes clinging/sustenance. From clinging/sustenance as a requisite condition comes becoming. From becoming as a requisite condition comes birth. From birth as a requisite condition, then aging & death, sorrow, lamentation, pain, distress, & despair come into play. This is the origination of the world.
The Blessed One said, "What is the All? Simply the eye & forms, ear & sounds, nose & aromas, tongue & flavors, body & tactile sensations, intellect & ideas. This, monks, is called the All. [1] Anyone who would say, 'Repudiating this All, I will describe another,' if questioned on what exactly might be the grounds for his statement, would be unable to explain, and furthermore, would be put to grief. Why? Because it lies beyond range."
Next time you see a tree you better remember this;
"Then, Bāhiya, you should train yourself thus: In reference to the seen, there will be only the seen. In reference to the heard, only the heard. In reference to the sensed, only the sensed. In reference to the cognized, only the cognized. That is how you should train yourself. When for you there will be only the seen in reference to the seen, only the heard in reference to the heard, only the sensed in reference to the sensed, only the cognized in reference to the cognized, then, Bāhiya, there is no you in connection with that. When there is no you in connection with that, there is no you there. When there is no you there, you are neither here nor yonder nor between the two. This, just this, is the end of stress."
and let seen only be the seen and stop conceiving of a world filled with entities and objects, stop objectifying what the senses present for it is based on that objectification that one thinks about those concepts and is assailed with related notions and ideas.

Ultimately this reality in it's entirety merely a consequent arising and ceasing of mind made sensory impressions

Anyway good luck to you and i apologize if i misrepresented your statements, it was definitely not my intention.
Last edited by rightviewftw on Fri Sep 21, 2018 10:01 pm, edited 2 times in total.
He goes to Niraya, the one who asserts what didn't take place, as does the one who, having done, says, 'I didn't.' Both — low-acting people — there become equal: after death, in the world beyond.
Tyranny of Words - An Introduction to General Semantics
How to Meditate: Mindfulness of Breathing
Factors of Enlightenment & Perceptions
How to Meditate: Basic Satipatthana
Parallel Dhammapada Reading

SarathW
Posts: 10183
Joined: Mon Sep 10, 2012 2:49 am

Re: The teachings of Ven. Waharaka Abhayaratanalankara Thero

Post by SarathW » Fri Sep 21, 2018 9:56 pm

@Lal Said
I have previously replied that statement by SarathW. It distorted what the Thero said in the desana.
I have listened to this recording again. I still understand the same.
Specially listened to recording at 8.01 where he mentioned that soldiers protecting people are borne as Lokapala Deva.
“As the lamp consumes oil, the path realises Nibbana”

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: kstan1122 and 5 guests