Aggregate?

A discussion on all aspects of Theravāda Buddhism
User avatar
tiltbillings
Posts: 23044
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2008 9:25 am

Re: Aggregate?

Post by tiltbillings » Fri Aug 10, 2012 3:34 am

retrofuturist wrote:Greetings,
tiltbillings wrote:
retrofuturist wrote: Believing in aggregates is a more refined classification than believing in atman,
Please. What do you mean "believing in aggregates?"
What Sylvester is doing in the post immediately above this one.

Metta,
Retro. :)
Sorry. Being a bit thick that is a bit too cryptic for me. Again, please explain what you mean by "believing in aggregates." Draw it out for me; give an example, a "for instances."
>> 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

User avatar
retrofuturist
Site Admin
Posts: 20039
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 9:52 pm
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Contact:

Re: Aggregate?

Post by retrofuturist » Fri Aug 10, 2012 3:35 am

Greetings all,
Sylvester wrote:Following of course the admonition of the Buddha, and not Madhyamika.
Sylvester ~ :strawman: ...it's all there in the suttas (e.g. SN 12.15), so long as you don't retrofit Mahavihara scholastic/philosophical realism back into it.

Tilt ~ As per Sylvester's posts above (and now Robert's post below), he openly stands alongside "believing in aggregates"... therefore your questions seeking elaboration upon what this position entails would therefore more productively be put to him than to me.

Darwid Halim ~ Again, well said.

Metta,
Retro. :)
"Do not force others, including children, by any means whatsoever, to adopt your views, whether by authority, threat, money, propaganda, or even education." - Ven. Thich Nhat Hanh

"The uprooting of identity is seen by the noble ones as pleasurable; but this contradicts what the whole world sees." (Snp 3.12)

"One discerns wrong view as wrong view, and right view as right view. This is one's right view." (MN 117)

Sylvester
Posts: 2205
Joined: Tue Mar 10, 2009 9:57 am

Re: Aggregate?

Post by Sylvester » Fri Aug 10, 2012 3:50 am

If Retro is incapable of accepting SN 22.63 at face value, but must resort to making a strawman of my position, it looks like I can have unagi for lunch today.

Even the most "Mahayana"-like sutta, ie MN 1, does not go to the extreme of sunyata that Retro attempts to foist on the Pali Dhamma. In that sutta, the problem is with conceiving a self, but not in perceiving an Aggregate.

If he believes that paṭighasamphassa were the problem, instead of the sequel to adhivacanasamphassa, ie attapaññatti, he should volunteer to re-write DN 15 to suit his world view.

And for heaven's sake, pls don't be so coy and titillate with "it's all there in the suttas". Cite your authority.

User avatar
robertk
Posts: 2825
Joined: Sat Jan 03, 2009 2:08 am

Re: Aggregate?

Post by robertk » Fri Aug 10, 2012 3:53 am

mikenz66 wrote:
retrofuturist wrote: Believing in aggregates is a more refined classification than believing in atman, so whether it's "problem" or (a preliminary) "solution" (to be abandoned over time) probably depends subjectively on where one starts.

Irrespective, taking one's classifications as being real or inherent, independent of the act of classifying... yes, that is "problem".
OK, well from my point of view there is nothing to "believe" in, since aggregates are not "things".

As you go on to say, it's discerning emptiness that seems to the be important point, and these classification are just aids to that development.

:anjali:
Mike
Actually the khandhas are very real, they are paratthama dhammas. It is self that is not real, that is mere imagination.

User avatar
tiltbillings
Posts: 23044
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2008 9:25 am

Re: Aggregate?

Post by tiltbillings » Fri Aug 10, 2012 4:03 am

retrofuturist wrote:
Tilt ~ As per Sylvester's posts above (and now Robert's posts below), he openly stands alongside "believing in aggregates"... therefore your questions seeking elaboration upon what this position entails would therefore more productively be put to him than to me.
I am asking you what you mean since you are the one that brought it up. And I am am asking this a third. I am simply asking that you clarify what you mean by "believing in aggregates," so that I am directly addressing your words on this, not some one elses (which seems to be a bit problemsatic with all these strawman accusations flying about).
>> 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

Sylvester
Posts: 2205
Joined: Tue Mar 10, 2009 9:57 am

Re: Aggregate?

Post by Sylvester » Fri Aug 10, 2012 4:04 am

tiltbillings wrote:
retrofuturist wrote:
Tilt ~ As per Sylvester's posts above (and now Robert's posts below), he openly stands alongside "believing in aggregates"... therefore your questions seeking elaboration upon what this position entails would therefore more productively be put to him than to me.
I am asking you what you mean since you are the one that brought it up. And I am am asking this a third. I am simply asking that you clarify what you mean by "believing in aggregates," so that I am directly addressing your words on this, not some one elses (which seems to be a bit problemsatic with all these strawman accusations flying about).
Time to invoke Vajirapani, if he does not respond...

User avatar
retrofuturist
Site Admin
Posts: 20039
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 9:52 pm
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Contact:

Re: Aggregate?

Post by retrofuturist » Fri Aug 10, 2012 4:08 am

Greetings Tilt,
tiltbillings wrote:I am asking you what you mean since you are the one that brought it up.
That being your ingrained mode of engagement...

Yet ironically you (correctly) observe the weaknesses of strawmen in dialogue, yet instead of actually questioning those who openly hold the position and can substantiate it without the risk of introducing strawman argumentation, you insist on me explaining their positions.

It's like asking me about Vajrayana when you've got the Dalai Lama sitting next to you... just get over this insistence that I answer your question and ask Robert or Sylvester what it is like to "believe in aggregates" if you genuinely wish to know.

If you wish to ask me what it is like to not "believe in aggregates", then by all means do.

(And if you ask me a fourth time, you own any strawmen that may inadvertantly come from my explanation...)

Metta,
Retro. :)
"Do not force others, including children, by any means whatsoever, to adopt your views, whether by authority, threat, money, propaganda, or even education." - Ven. Thich Nhat Hanh

"The uprooting of identity is seen by the noble ones as pleasurable; but this contradicts what the whole world sees." (Snp 3.12)

"One discerns wrong view as wrong view, and right view as right view. This is one's right view." (MN 117)

Sylvester
Posts: 2205
Joined: Tue Mar 10, 2009 9:57 am

Re: Aggregate?

Post by Sylvester » Fri Aug 10, 2012 4:18 am

No Retro.

You brought this upon yourself by attributing to me and putting upon my lips what you disagree with. I cited DN 15 and SN 22.61, not Sarvastivadin Tri-Temporal Materialism.

And if you had half the decency to check what the Mahavihara Commentators actually had to say about sabhāva in response to Sarvastivadin Materialism, you would not have put your foot in your mouth by foisting some pop sound-bite emanating from the Mahayana camp about the Mahavihara or even identifying my position with it.

One would have thought that after the gazillion times Tilt has posted the Commentary to the Dhammasaṅgaṇī's treatment of sabhāva that readers would have abandoned pop sound-bites for a more nuanced understanding of the Theravada position.

User avatar
mikenz66
Posts: 16426
Joined: Sat Jan 10, 2009 7:37 am
Location: Aotearoa, New Zealand

Re: Aggregate?

Post by mikenz66 » Fri Aug 10, 2012 4:25 am

Hi Retro,
retrofuturist wrote: Sylvester ~ :strawman: ...it's all there in the suttas (e.g. SN 12.15), so long as you don't retrofit Mahavihara scholastic/philosophical realism back into it.
You seem to be the one insisting on realism and scholastic wordplay. As far as I'm concerned the Buddha taught (and the Mahavihara worked out in some detail) are ways of classifying experience, and hence aiding liberation.

It would be interesting to see some sutta evidence that classification, or even reification for those who might like to choose to do reification, is actually an obstacle to liberation. All you seem to be offering at present is a preference for a particular philosophical approach.

:anjali:
Mike

User avatar
tiltbillings
Posts: 23044
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2008 9:25 am

Re: Aggregate?

Post by tiltbillings » Fri Aug 10, 2012 4:29 am

retrofuturist wrote:Greetings Tilt,
tiltbillings wrote:I am asking you what you mean since you are the one that brought it up.
That being your ingrained mode of engagement...

Yet ironically you (correctly) observe the weaknesses of strawmen in dialogue, yet instead of actually questioning those who openly hold the position and can substantiate it without the risk of introducing strawman argumentation, you insist on me explaining their positions.

It's like asking me about Vajrayana when you've got the Dalai Lama sitting next to you... just get over this insistence that I answer your question and ask Robert or Sylvester what it is like to "believe in aggregates" if you genuinely wish to know.

If you wish to ask me what it is like to not "believe in aggregates", then by all means do.

(And if you ask me a fourth time, you own any strawmen that may inadvertantly come from my explanation...)

Metta,
Retro. :)
I am asking a fourth time.
>> 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

User avatar
retrofuturist
Site Admin
Posts: 20039
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 9:52 pm
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Contact:

Re: Aggregate?

Post by retrofuturist » Fri Aug 10, 2012 4:31 am

Greetings Mike,
mikenz66 wrote:It would be interesting to see some sutta evidence that classification, or even reification for those who might like to choose to do reification, is actually an obstacle to liberation. All you seem to be offering at present is a preference for a particular philosophical approach.
Observe the progression of refinement and the means by which earlier perspectives are transcended, such that there is view that 'Whatever is fabricated & mentally fashioned is inconstant & subject to cessation' in the following sutta...

MN 121: Cula-suññata Sutta
http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka ... .than.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Metta,
Retro. :)
"Do not force others, including children, by any means whatsoever, to adopt your views, whether by authority, threat, money, propaganda, or even education." - Ven. Thich Nhat Hanh

"The uprooting of identity is seen by the noble ones as pleasurable; but this contradicts what the whole world sees." (Snp 3.12)

"One discerns wrong view as wrong view, and right view as right view. This is one's right view." (MN 117)

pegembara
Posts: 1249
Joined: Tue Oct 13, 2009 8:39 am

Re: Aggregate?

Post by pegembara » Fri Aug 10, 2012 4:33 am

The five groups are the heavy load,
The seizing of the load is man[self].
Holding it is misery,
Laying down the load is bliss.
Laying down this heavy load,
And no other taking up,
By uprooting all desire,
Hunger's stilled, Nibbaana's gained.

http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka ... .wlsh.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Have you laid down the burden?
And what is right speech? Abstaining from lying, from divisive speech, from abusive speech, & from idle chatter: This is called right speech.

Sylvester
Posts: 2205
Joined: Tue Mar 10, 2009 9:57 am

Re: Aggregate?

Post by Sylvester » Fri Aug 10, 2012 4:38 am

retrofuturist wrote: Sylvester ~ :strawman: ...it's all there in the suttas (e.g. SN 12.15), so long as you don't retrofit Mahavihara scholastic/philosophical realism back into it.
Thank you for citing the oft-abused SN 12.15. The subject of that sutta's injunction is not the Aggregates. This much is clear from SN 22.94. There the Buddha utters the, gasp!!!, Realist heresies of Aggregates existing.

If you bother to look at the Pali for SN 12.15, the locative case is used for loka, not the accusative case, meaning that the notion of atthitā and natthitā were directed not at the loka, but at something that took the loka to be self/Self.
Last edited by Sylvester on Fri Aug 10, 2012 4:43 am, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
retrofuturist
Site Admin
Posts: 20039
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 9:52 pm
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Contact:

Re: Aggregate?

Post by retrofuturist » Fri Aug 10, 2012 4:39 am

Greetings,

Tilt ~
retrofuturist wrote:(And if you ask me a fourth time, you own any strawmen that may inadvertantly come from my explanation...)
tiltbillings wrote:I am asking a fourth time.
"Believing in aggregates" means to believe that those things classified under the khandhas-scheme have inherent existence, independent of any observation and experience of them.

"Believing in aggregates" means to think such things are in some way "real", independently of the act of their fabrication, which is dependent upon avijja.

"Believing in aggregates" means to think that the true nature of aggregates is to be understood through looking at and analysing them through the lens of perception with increasing levels of magnification, without actually questioning the distortion that the frame/lens of that perception itself introduces, and the volitional role it plays in forming samsara.

Pegembara ~ :goodpost: (it's a shame no one seems particularly interested in investigating what you and Darwid have been saying in this topic... but don't let that discourage you from speaking good Dhamma!)

Metta,
Retro. :)
"Do not force others, including children, by any means whatsoever, to adopt your views, whether by authority, threat, money, propaganda, or even education." - Ven. Thich Nhat Hanh

"The uprooting of identity is seen by the noble ones as pleasurable; but this contradicts what the whole world sees." (Snp 3.12)

"One discerns wrong view as wrong view, and right view as right view. This is one's right view." (MN 117)

User avatar
mikenz66
Posts: 16426
Joined: Sat Jan 10, 2009 7:37 am
Location: Aotearoa, New Zealand

Re: Aggregate?

Post by mikenz66 » Fri Aug 10, 2012 4:45 am

Hi Retro,
retrofuturist wrote:
mikenz66 wrote:It would be interesting to see some sutta evidence that classification, or even reification for those who might like to choose to do reification, is actually an obstacle to liberation. All you seem to be offering at present is a preference for a particular philosophical approach.
Observe the progression of refinement and the means by which earlier perspectives are transcended, such that there is view that 'Whatever is fabricated & mentally fashioned is inconstant & subject to cessation' in the following sutta...

MN 121: Cula-suññata Sutta
http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka ... .than.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Here's Bhikkhu Bodhi's translation of the relevant refrain (which isn't much different from Thanissaro Bhikkhu's):
‘This signless concentration of mind is conditioned and volitionally produced. But whatever is conditioned and volitionally produced is impermanent, subject to cessation.
Whether or not one takes those conditioned things as "real" doesn't seem to me to be of any particular significance. Can you give a sutta example which actually addresses this "reality" issue?

:anjali:
Mike

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot] and 90 guests