Will wrote:Unlike retro and others I do not see ....
Jack wrote:I agree with the others that you need the category of mental formations to account for all the other mental constituents.
Why do you call it a non-time-delineated model?
Jack wrote:What interests me is how one takes the conceptual model of Dependent Origination into their real life. Care to comment?
appicchato wrote:In the 'Nama' segment it's broken down into five different categories...this is a new one on me, as it is usually defined as consisting of the four mental groups...feeling, perception, mental formations, and consciousness...just wondering a little where you came up with the three besides feeling and perception...
Fede wrote:Would somebody please explain to me what is meant by Eye/ear/nose/and so on - Feeling?
Craving for certain stimuli contact with certain stimuli and the sense-bases themselves are relatively self-explanatory.
But I don't think I fully comprehend the 'feeling' inference....
Are we talking about actual sensation and action of the sense itself.... the sense in action?
Or is there an 'emotive' angle?
Jechbi wrote:Thank you for posting this here. I did not understand why it was regarded as controversial in the first place.
Jechbi wrote:One question: When I first saw this chart, I had the impression that literal rebirth is implicit in it. What do you think?
Some interesting thoughts on the non-time-delineated model of dependent origination from Ajahn Sumedho...
Extract from The Way It Is
http://www.amaravati.org/abmnew/documen ... 20moa.html
Love is no problem once there is no delusion, once there is no self, there's nothing to hinder or block off or prevent love. But as long as there is self-illusion then love is just an idea that we long for but are always feeling disappointed with because the self is getting in the way. The self-view is always blinding us, making us forget and deluding us that there isn't any love. We feel alienated and lonely and lost because there doesn't seem to be any love, so we blame somebody else. Or we blame ourselves, maybe because we're not loveable. Or we become cynics.
But the Buddha pointed to this and asked what was the real problem? It's the illusion of a self. It's the attachment to that perception. That affects the consciousness and everything else so we are always creating the separations, and the dissatisfaction and identifying with that which is not ourselves. Once we are free from that illusion then love is ever-present. It's just that we can't see it or enjoy it when we are blinded by our desires and fears. As you understand this more and more your faith increases and there is a willingness to give up everything. There is a real zest, a joy in being with the way things are.
Users browsing this forum: Exabot [Bot], Google [Bot], Nicolas and 2 guests