Dhamma Wheel Buddhist Forum

tiltbillings wrote:

Sherab wrote:
So there is a "pure" realm where undefiled conditioning drives its existence and where "pure" beings abide and there is the "impure" realm driven by defiled conditionings where we the "impure" beings abide?

Not taught in the Pali suttas.

I know, but that seems to me to be the logical conclusion from your previous post.

Sherab wrote:

tiltbillings wrote:

Sherab wrote:
So there is a "pure" realm where undefiled conditioning drives its existence and where "pure" beings abide and there is the "impure" realm driven by defiled conditionings where we the "impure" beings abide?

Not taught in the Pali suttas.

I know, but that seems to me to be the logical conclusion from your previous post.

Sherab wrote:

tiltbillings wrote:

Sherab wrote:
So there is a "pure" realm where undefiled conditioning drives its existence and where "pure" beings abide and there is the "impure" realm driven by defiled conditionings where we the "impure" beings abide?

Not taught in the Pali suttas.

I know, but that seems to me to be the logical conclusion from your previous post.

Interesting, I would say just the opposite, at least. I kind of wonder if you are making an unwarranted jump somewhere along the line. Because there is no separate realms of the unconditioned as opposed to the conditioned, that we can free ourselves from the conditioning of greed, hatred, and delusion.

jcsuperstar wrote:

Sherab wrote:
I know, but that seems to me to be the logical conclusion from your previous post.

From Tiltbillings previous post:
"The conditioning that matters, that chain of conditioning which keeps us bound to samsara has stopped, but the conditions of life still continue."
What else could be concluded from the above?

Where are you getting this "realm" business from?

For a Buddha, they deal with the same stuff everyone else does, but they are free from clinging, and so free from craving and aversion, no longer influenced by them. An awakened person interacts with the same world, but without pushing or pulling, or stress. That's it.

Sherab wrote:

jcsuperstar wrote:

Sherab wrote:
I know, but that seems to me to be the logical conclusion from your previous post.

From Tiltbillings previous post:
"The conditioning that matters, that chain of conditioning which keeps us bound to samsara has stopped, but the conditions of life still continue."
What else could be concluded from the above?

Well, the awakened one is no longer bound by the conditioning of greed, hatred, and delusion. That does not suggest some other pure realm. After all the Buddha finds himself no less the world, as my sutta quotation shows, than are we.

I certainly do not follow your jump here. You will need to spell it out for. Unquestionably I am stuck on stupid here.

I am retiring to bed to review some past tense Irish verbs and to lay in the lap of Nyx, to dream dreams. So, I'll respond to whatever when I acheive awakening in this AM.

tiltbillings wrote:Interesting, I would say just the opposite, at least. I kind of wonder if you are making an unwarranted jump somewhere along the line. Because there is no separate realms of the unconditioned as opposed to the conditioned, that we can free ourselves from the conditioning of greed, hatred, and delusion.

You are right. I did make a jump.

The jump is that the realm that sentient beings ("impure" beings) inhabit are "created" by their collective karma (collective defiled conditionings?). "Pure" beings therefore do not share the same collective karma to inhabit in the same realm as the "impure" beings. Since you said "the conditions for life still continue", I presume that "pure" beings should logically be abiding in a different realm that I labelled as "pure" realm. Of course, "pure" beings if they so wish, could choose to be in the "impure" realm of "impure" beings. Does this make sense to you?

Do you Sherab have direct and personal knowledge that these realms actually exist ?

Sanghamitta wrote:Do you Sherab have direct and personal knowledge that these realms actually exist ?

Huh? I was merely making a conclusion based on what Tiltbillings posted. If the conclusion is right, then Tiltbillings' post is right. If the conclusion is wrong, then Tiltbillings' post is wrong.

It seems to me that my question is clear and straightforward.

Sherab wrote:

tiltbillings wrote:Interesting, I would say just the opposite, at least. I kind of wonder if you are making an unwarranted jump somewhere along the line. Because there is no separate realms of the unconditioned as opposed to the conditioned, that we can free ourselves from the conditioning of greed, hatred, and delusion.

You are right. I did make a jump.

The jump is that the realm that sentient beings ("impure" beings) inhabit are "created" by their collective karma (collective defiled conditionings?). "Pure" beings therefore do not share the same collective karma to inhabit in the same realm as the "impure" beings. Since you said "the conditions for life still continue", I presume that "pure" beings should logically be abiding in a different realm that I labelled as "pure" realm. Of course, "pure" beings if they so wish, could choose to be in the "impure" realm of "impure" beings. Does this make sense to you?

"Collective karma" is kind of a Mahayana thing, it seems. Collective karma was not taught in the suttas and "realm" here is at best a figure of speech. And just to ask, are you implying the buddha-field thing here?

And you have totally missed my point, it seems.

Sherab wrote:When ignorance disappear, sankhara disappear; when sankhara disappear, vinnana disappear as so on. In other words, the whole PS chain disappear. If the whole PS chain disappear, what have we got left?

Are you asking in reference to an arahant who is still alive or who has died his last death? An arahant who is still alive still experiences some of the PS chain. For example, contact still leads to feeling. Food will still taste good or bad or neither good nor bad. But feeling will no longer lead to craving. For example, the arahant will neither crave good tasting food nor resist bad tasting food.

To put it another way, there is no separate realm. An arahant lives in the same world as the rest of us. His senses still function, he still eats, and sleeps, and thinks, and eventually he dies.

The jump is that the realm that sentient beings ("impure" beings) inhabit are "created" by their ... karma. "Pure" beings therefore do not share the same collective karma to inhabit in the same realm as the "impure" beings.

An arahant continues to live in this impure realm as a result of past karma. Some past karma resulted in him being born. Once born, one grows, older, sicker, and eventually dies. Arahantship does not change this. Once the arahant eventually dies, however, there is no condition for him to be born again.

Now if you are asking about an arahant after death... well the Buddha said quite explicitly that this is something beyond talking about.

dhamma follower wrote: IMHU, the luminous mind is the natural quality of the mind to know things as they are before defilements come in. This is also the mind of an arahant. An ordinary person can also experience this luminous mind when he attains the stage of equanimity toward all formations. The minds is extremely sharp, is aware of the minutest details and totally equanimous. It has the quality of being luminous but there's no light, it's simply the luminosity of wisdom or fredom from defilements.

How different is this, really, from Ch’an/Zen “original mind”? Don’t throw rotten fruit at me, peeps – it just seems glaringly evident. You don’t have to read far in any Ch’an text to see a similar concept described in similar language...almost to the letter, in fact, down to the sharpness of mind during satori, the freedom from defilements, equanimity towards formations, etc...

tiltbillings wrote:We could go the Mahayana route and essentially deify the Buddha, stating his mind utterly other than ours, which the Mahayana takes to docetic heights. That is not necessarily the picture we get in the suttas. There is no subtle truly true reality. For the Buddha, or any awakened individual, it is the same stuff we all deal with.

Yet Mayahana asserts that the Buddha's mind is intrinsically within us -- some schools make a point of categorically rejecting the "otherness" you mention. That even applies to the most quasi-theistic branches, e.g. Pure Land.

[/digression]

I don't think anyone would disagree with the idea that all minds have the potential for awakening, which I understand to be the gist of the Original Mind and Buddha Nature stuff, but I think the problem is when all sorts of other weird stuff get added into that. I'm not talking about anyone in particular, but it happens.