Greetings,
"If one does not aggregate (verb), there are is no aggregate (noun), let alone five of them"
Alternatively...
"If one does not bundle (verb), there are is no bundle (noun), let alone five of them"
Agree? Disagree?
Discuss.
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/aggregate" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/bundle" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Metta,
Retro.
Aggregate?
- retrofuturist
- Posts: 27848
- Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 9:52 pm
- Location: Melbourne, Australia
- Contact:
Aggregate?
"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."
- tiltbillings
- Posts: 23046
- Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2008 9:25 am
Re: Aggregate?
Is there a "one" that bundles/aggregates? And, of course to paraphrase, when "one" is liable to bundling because of self(, which is itself the result of bunbling), having known the perils in what is liable to bunbling, seeks freedom from bundling, the uttermost security from bundling -- no longer bound -- won freedom from bundling, the uttermost security from the bundling -- no longer bound."retrofuturist wrote:Greetings,
"If one does not aggregate (verb), there are is no aggregate (noun), let alone five of them"
Alternatively...
"If one does not bundle (verb), there are is no bundle (noun), let alone five of them"
Agree? Disagree?
Discuss.
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/aggregate" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/bundle" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Metta,
Retro.
>> 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
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
Re: Aggregate?
Hi Retro
What's the verb you were thinking of in the Pali?
I think the usual suspects for the arising of the acquisitions/upadhi would be the various forms of sankhāra such as those denoted by the verbs ceteti, pakappeti or anuseti. This per the 2nd nidāna.
What's the verb you were thinking of in the Pali?
I think the usual suspects for the arising of the acquisitions/upadhi would be the various forms of sankhāra such as those denoted by the verbs ceteti, pakappeti or anuseti. This per the 2nd nidāna.
- Polar Bear
- Posts: 1348
- Joined: Mon Apr 16, 2012 7:39 am
Re: Aggregate?
if you explain your point a little more clearly retro, that would be great
"I don't envision a single thing that, when developed & cultivated, leads to such great benefit as the mind. The mind, when developed & cultivated, leads to great benefit."
"I don't envision a single thing that, when undeveloped & uncultivated, brings about such suffering & stress as the mind. The mind, when undeveloped & uncultivated, brings about suffering & stress."
"I don't envision a single thing that, when undeveloped & uncultivated, brings about such suffering & stress as the mind. The mind, when undeveloped & uncultivated, brings about suffering & stress."
Re: Aggregate?
retrofuturist wrote:Greetings,
"If one does not aggregate (verb), there are is no aggregate (noun), let alone five of them"
Alternatively...
"If one does not bundle (verb), there are is no bundle (noun), let alone five of them"
http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka ... .than.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;He discerns that 'This mode of perception is empty of the effluent of sensuality... becoming... ignorance. And there is just this non-emptiness: that connected with the six sensory spheres, dependent on this very body with life as its condition.' Thus he regards it as empty of whatever is not there. Whatever remains, he discerns as present: 'There is this.'
"When one thing is practiced & pursued, ignorance is abandoned, clear knowing arises, the conceit 'I am' is abandoned, latent tendencies are uprooted, fetters are abandoned. Which one thing? Mindfulness immersed in the body." -AN 1.230
-
- Posts: 10186
- Joined: Fri Mar 05, 2010 10:32 am
- Location: Andromeda looks nice
Re: Aggregate?
Disagree. We're stuck with them.retrofuturist wrote:Greetings,
"If one does not aggregate (verb), there are is no aggregate (noun), let alone five of them"
Agree? Disagree?
Buddha save me from new-agers!
- tiltbillings
- Posts: 23046
- Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2008 9:25 am
Re: Aggregate?
Indeed we are, but we are not stuck with the attachment to/identification with them.porpoise wrote:Disagree. We're stuck with them.retrofuturist wrote:Greetings,
"If one does not aggregate (verb), there are is no aggregate (noun), let alone five of them"
Agree? Disagree?
>> 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
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
- retrofuturist
- Posts: 27848
- Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 9:52 pm
- Location: Melbourne, Australia
- Contact:
Re: Aggregate?
Greetings all,
Tilt ~ "One" is there only because the English language has a requirement for a subject in such a sentence. One might says there is bundling, but no bundler to be found. Re: "seeks freedom from bundling, the uttermost security from bundling -- no longer bound -- won freedom from bundling, the uttermost security from the bundling -- no longer bound."... well said.
Sylvester ~ I had no corresponding Pali term in mind for the verbs, though you're welcome to propose something should you wish.
Kirk ~ Nice quote.
polarbuddha101 ~ I'm challenging the oft made statement that the aggregates are "what we are"... these things are self only if they are erroneously picked up, taken up and bundled/aggregated as such. Unaggregated, they are not aggregates. Unbundled, they are not bundles.
Porpoise ~ Thanks for sharing your thoughts.
Metta,
Retro.
Tilt ~ "One" is there only because the English language has a requirement for a subject in such a sentence. One might says there is bundling, but no bundler to be found. Re: "seeks freedom from bundling, the uttermost security from bundling -- no longer bound -- won freedom from bundling, the uttermost security from the bundling -- no longer bound."... well said.
Sylvester ~ I had no corresponding Pali term in mind for the verbs, though you're welcome to propose something should you wish.
Kirk ~ Nice quote.
polarbuddha101 ~ I'm challenging the oft made statement that the aggregates are "what we are"... these things are self only if they are erroneously picked up, taken up and bundled/aggregated as such. Unaggregated, they are not aggregates. Unbundled, they are not bundles.
Porpoise ~ Thanks for sharing your thoughts.
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."
Re: Aggregate?
With this, I would agree, being a fan of Sue Hamilton on this score.retrofuturist wrote:Greetings all,
polarbuddha101 ~ I'm challenging the oft made statement that the aggregates are "what we are"...
I think this will probably not find a place in the traditional understanding of the Aggregates (associated with) Clinging (pañcupādānakkhandhā) versus the mere Aggregates - see SN 22.48.these things are self only if they are erroneously picked up, taken up and bundled/aggregated as such. Unaggregated, they are not aggregates. Unbundled, they are not bundles.
What Tilt alludes to in terms of the attachment or identification is represented by the verb upādiyati (take up). It's related to the noun upādāna (clinging). This verb comes up famously in SN 12.15 where its function is tied to the formative powers of the belief "my self" (attā me). Perhaps this is the closest verb to what you had in mind, BUT, whether one clings or not, whether one is awash in the āsavas or not, one is able to say whether the Aggregates are or are not.
Last edited by Sylvester on Fri Aug 10, 2012 5:04 am, edited 1 time in total.
-
- Posts: 10186
- Joined: Fri Mar 05, 2010 10:32 am
- Location: Andromeda looks nice
Re: Aggregate?
An aggregate is just a collection, in this case a collection of processes based on which we assume a self.retrofuturist wrote:I'm challenging the oft made statement that the aggregates are "what we are"... these things are self only if they are erroneously picked up, taken up and bundled/aggregated as such. Unaggregated, they are not aggregates. Unbundled, they are not bundles.
Buddha save me from new-agers!
- DarwidHalim
- Posts: 537
- Joined: Thu Sep 08, 2011 11:49 am
- Location: Neither Samsara nor Nirvana
Re: Aggregate?
Retro,
If one doesn't bundle (verb), there is no bundle (noun).
If one doesnt aggregate (verb), there is no aggregate (noun).
Yes, I agree.
Now, I want to ask this:
So, how can there are aggregate of feeling, perception, etc., when there is no owner?
Since there is no owner that ever make them.
If one doesn't bundle (verb), there is no bundle (noun).
If one doesnt aggregate (verb), there is no aggregate (noun).
Yes, I agree.
Now, I want to ask this:
So, how can there are aggregate of feeling, perception, etc., when there is no owner?
Since there is no owner that ever make them.
I am not here nor there.
I am not right nor wrong.
I do not exist neither non-exist.
I am not I nor non-I.
I am not in samsara nor nirvana.
To All Buddhas, I bow down for the teaching of emptiness. Thank You!
I am not right nor wrong.
I do not exist neither non-exist.
I am not I nor non-I.
I am not in samsara nor nirvana.
To All Buddhas, I bow down for the teaching of emptiness. Thank You!
- tiltbillings
- Posts: 23046
- Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2008 9:25 am
Re: Aggregate?
I am assuming you are talking about the khandhas.retrofuturist wrote: I'm challenging the oft made statement that the aggregates are "what we are"... these things are self only if they are erroneously picked up, taken up and bundled/aggregated as such. Unaggregated, they are not aggregates. Unbundled, they are not bundles.
What does Unaggregated, they are not aggregates. Unbundled, they are not bundles mean? I wonder if the "what we are" needs to be explained a bit more.
>> 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
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
Re: Aggregate?
paticca-samuppadaDarwidHalim wrote: So, how can there are aggregate of feeling, perception, etc., when there is no owner?
Since there is no owner that ever make them.
"When one thing is practiced & pursued, ignorance is abandoned, clear knowing arises, the conceit 'I am' is abandoned, latent tendencies are uprooted, fetters are abandoned. Which one thing? Mindfulness immersed in the body." -AN 1.230
- DarwidHalim
- Posts: 537
- Joined: Thu Sep 08, 2011 11:49 am
- Location: Neither Samsara nor Nirvana
Re: Aggregate?
Kirk,
Please try to avoid jargon, since jargon doesn't help.
If we want to use Pali, we need people who understand Pali. If we only understand one or two words, it is also no use.
Please try to avoid jargon, since jargon doesn't help.
If we want to use Pali, we need people who understand Pali. If we only understand one or two words, it is also no use.
I am not here nor there.
I am not right nor wrong.
I do not exist neither non-exist.
I am not I nor non-I.
I am not in samsara nor nirvana.
To All Buddhas, I bow down for the teaching of emptiness. Thank You!
I am not right nor wrong.
I do not exist neither non-exist.
I am not I nor non-I.
I am not in samsara nor nirvana.
To All Buddhas, I bow down for the teaching of emptiness. Thank You!
Re: Aggregate?
retrofuturist wrote:Greetings,
"If one does not aggregate (verb), there are is no aggregate (noun), let alone five of them"
Alternatively...
"If one does not bundle (verb), there are is no bundle (noun), let alone five of them"
Agree? Disagree?
Another alternate:tiltbillings wrote:Is there a "one" that bundles/aggregates? And, of course to paraphrase, when "one" is liable to bundling because of self(, which is itself the result of bunbling)..."
"If there is no accumulating(verb), there is no accumulation(noun), let alone 5 of them."
Accumulation is Venerable Punnaji’s rendering. I dig it.
“Life is swept along, short is the life span; no shelters exist for one who has reached old age. Seeing clearly this danger in death, a seeker of peace should drop the world’s bait.” SN 1.3