The causes for wisdom

A discussion on all aspects of Theravāda Buddhism
User avatar
robertk
Posts: 5613
Joined: Sat Jan 03, 2009 2:08 am

Re: The causes for wisdom

Post by robertk »

dear tilt,
i guess you mean this ( or similar) from Thanissaro:
An example of spiritual bypassing is this: Suppose you have troubles in your life and you don't want to engage in the difficult business of trying to become more mature in dealing with others or negotiating the conflicting desires in your own mind. Instead, you simply go and meditate, you do prostrations, you do chanting, and you hope that those practices will magically make the problems in your life go away. This is called spiritual bypassing — an unskillful way of clinging to habits and practices. As you can imagine, it's not very healthy — and not very effective. People often come back from meditation retreats and they still have the same problems they had before.



From: Talk 5 in "Selves & Not-self" -'The Ego on the Path', by Ven. Thanissaro Bhikkhu
and this ( both posted in other threads today and yesterday:

"
Even in Buddhist circles, you find various kinds of meditation where as they say, "Everything has all been thought out, everything has all been worked out, just follow the instructions. Don't think, don't add anything of your own." It's interesting to note that a lot of these methods also refer to the teaching on not-self as egolessness. Any sense of pride, any sense of independence is a bad thing in those meditation traditions. As one tradition would say, just be totally passive and aware, very equanimous, and just let your old sankharas burn away. And above all, don't think. Or if you are going to think, they say, learn how to think the way we think. And they have huge volumes of philosophy you have to learn, to squeeze your mind into their mold.... But that doesn't work." ~ Thanissaro Bhikkhu "Adult Dhamma", Meditations5,
you have a point ( about disparagement) but then maybe sometimes the criticisers also have a point ?

you wrote today on another thread that

Like the other phenomenological Buddhists, he writes in obscure-ese, with is the de rigueur for the phenomenological crowd. It makes what could be stated fairly simply sound more important. Also, N. Nanmoli's comments about "methods" shows a fairly immature understanding of the issue, despite the labored syntax


i would guess a N. nanamoli devotee wouldn't appreciate that but I wouldn't begrudge you the right to your opinion. personally I find being exposed to various ideas is useful, even ones I disagree with. Disclaimer: some ideas are so misinformed or weakly thought out that they truly are a waste of everyone's time.

even more important though is delving into the Theravada texts: they are where right view is expressed (IMHO) :anjali:
User avatar
tiltbillings
Posts: 23046
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2008 9:25 am

Re: The causes for wisdom

Post by tiltbillings »

robertk wrote:dear tilt,
i guess you mean this ( or similar) from Thanissaro:
...
Not that. Try Thanissaro's book on meditation which was discussed on DW at length.


From: Talk 5 in "Selves & Not-self" -'The Ego on the Path', by Ven. Thanissaro Bhikkhu
and this ( both posted in other threads today and yesterday:

"
Even in Buddhist circles, you find various kinds of meditation where as they say, "Everything has all been thought out, everything has all been worked out, just follow the instructions. Don't think, don't add anything of your own." It's interesting to note that a lot of these methods also refer to the teaching on not-self as egolessness. Any sense of pride, any sense of independence is a bad thing in those meditation traditions. As one tradition would say, just be totally passive and aware, very equanimous, and just let your old sankharas burn away. And above all, don't think. Or if you are going to think, they say, learn how to think the way we think. And they have huge volumes of philosophy you have to learn, to squeeze your mind into their mold.... But that doesn't work." ~ Thanissaro Bhikkhu "Adult Dhamma", Meditations5,
The problem with this is that it is a strawman construct, not at all accurately reflecting the position with which he disagrees.
you have a point ( about disparagement) but then maybe sometimes the criticisers also have a point ?
The problem is with the individuals I named that in their portrayals of what they are criticizing are grossly inaccurate, showing no real understanding of what it they criticizing. One can accurately understand a differing point of view and accurately criticize it, but this not what we see with these people.
personally I find being exposed to various ideas is useful, even ones I disagree with.
even more important though is delving into the Theravada texts: they are where right view is expressed (IMHO)
I have no problem with engaging differing opinions, finding value in well done, carefully considered criticism. I find no value in the strawman approach.
Last edited by tiltbillings on Sun Aug 07, 2016 5:34 am, edited 1 time in total.
>> 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
robertk
Posts: 5613
Joined: Sat Jan 03, 2009 2:08 am

Re: The causes for wisdom

Post by robertk »

yes good points. The strawman is always a problem, and any criticism should be fair . sometimes we criticise without a correct understanding of an issue.
User avatar
robertk
Posts: 5613
Joined: Sat Jan 03, 2009 2:08 am

Re: The causes for wisdom

Post by robertk »

A repost of something I wrote a while back



Ti lakkahana is the three general characteristics ie. anicca, dukkha and anatta of all realities except nibbana(which is anatta only). But all realities also have visesa lakkhana - specific characteristics - and before the general characateristics can be penetrated there must be the insight into the specific. So the first stage of insight is called namarupaparicheddanan - the delimitation of mind and matter - and this insight clearly knows that mind and matter have distinctly different characteristics.

In the Mulapariyaya Sutta (see Bodhi "Root of Existence") the Buddha explains that

Ti lakkahana is the three general characteristics ie. anicca, dukkha and anatta of all realities except nibbana(which is anatta only). But all realities also have visesa lakkhana - specific characteristics - and before the general characateristics can be penetrated there must be the insight into the specific. So the first stage of insight is called namarupaparicheddanan - the delimitation of mind and matter - and this insight clearly knows that mind and matter have distinctly different characteristics.

In the Mulapariyaya Sutta (see Bodhi "Root of Existence") the Buddha explains that


'the uninstructed worldling perceives earth as earth......and he perceives the seen as the seen ..the heard as he heard...the sensed as the sensed..the cognised as the cognised..Having perceived the cognised as the cognised he conceives himself as the cognised..in the cognised...apart from the cognised..the cognised is mine..What is the reason? Because it has not being fully understood.





"
.


The uninstructed worldling knows something of the characteristics of dhammas, he knows when he craves or feels angry. He can experience all types of subtle vibrations and hardness and coldness If he trains himself by yoga etc. He can know that these are changing and many other things. But he conceives them wrongly as being me or mine etc.. The enligthened one experiences these same dhammas but with the eye of wisdom.

From the commentary and tika to this sutta: p39

"
they bear their own characteristics, thus they are dhammas: This is said for the purpose of showing that these are mere dhammas endowed with the specific natures devoid of such attributions as that of 'being' etc... These dhammas are discovered as ultimately real actualities. [..] Also they are borne, or they are discerned, known, according to their specific nature, thus



Many years can be spent doing difficult practices, but imho they are a diversion from the real path which is one of understanding whatever appears as anatta- and that understanding can only arise when there is firm right intellectual understanding. And correct intellectual understanding is rather rare without which no further progress will occur.
The "uninstructed worldling" (p40 of Mulapariyaya) "needs to be taught, because he possesses neither learning(agama) nor achievement. For he who possesses neither the learning running counter to the activity of conceiving because he has neglected to study, question, and discriminate the aggregates (khandhas), elements, sense bases (ayatanas) truths, law of conditionality and foundations of mindfulness etc , nor spiritual achievement because he has failed to achieve what should be achived by practice is said to be 'uninstructed'.


Between the enlightened ones and the 'uninstructed worldling' there is the "good worldling" who is learning and developing correctly:


p41 "The Buddha, the kinsman of the sun, speaks of the worldling in a twofold way. One is the worldling blinded by darkness and the other is the worldling noble and good
"


Bhikkhu Bodhi notes in his introduction to Mulapariyaya p14 That


"in the stage of full understanding of the known, the gross object is analysed into its constituent dhammas and each dhamma is delimited in its distinct characteristic, function, manifestation, and proximate cause. This procedure rectifies the common sense assumption of simple substantial unites, disclosing in its place a world of composite wholes brought temporarily together through a concatenation of conditions"
User avatar
robertk
Posts: 5613
Joined: Sat Jan 03, 2009 2:08 am

Re: The causes for wisdom

Post by robertk »

tiltbillings wrote:
robertk wrote:robertk wrote:
But what is thought to be mindfulness in common parlance is often some type of tedious focussing on an approximation of the here and now. This is merely concentration, without any sati or panna, and is a wrong path.
Okay. Examples of this. Who teaches such a thing?




see this (posted on another thread today)
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/11/26/opini ... .html?_r=0
’m making a failed attempt at “mindful dishwashing,” the subject of a how-to article an acquaintance recently shared on Facebook. According to the practice’s thought leaders, in order to maximize our happiness, we should refuse to succumb to domestic autopilot and instead be fully “in” the present moment, engaging completely with every clump of oatmeal and decomposing particle of scrambled egg. Mindfulness is supposed to be a defense against the pressures of modern life, but it’s starting to feel suspiciously like it’s actually adding to them.
User avatar
robertk
Posts: 5613
Joined: Sat Jan 03, 2009 2:08 am

Re: The causes for wisdom

Post by robertk »

Specific points about satipatthana and Sujin Boriharnwanaket moved here.
viewtopic.php?f=44&t=32721&p=485800#p485800
User avatar
robertk
Posts: 5613
Joined: Sat Jan 03, 2009 2:08 am

Re: The causes for wisdom

Post by robertk »

I looked over a website retro linked to today and thought this section, although I don't agree with all of it, was pertinent to this thread:
http://www.hillsidehermitage.org/intent ... s-actions/ by Ajahn Nyanamoli Thero
Right meditation is inseparable from the Right view. That means that even if a person doesn’t have the Right view, their meditation should be concerned about getting it. To put it simply – it comes down to developing the self-transparency (or self-honesty) concerning skilful as skilful (kusala) and unskilful as unskilful (akusala). The Buddha defined the Right view in those very terms – knowing “good as good”, and “bad as bad”. The person with the Right view knows for oneself, beyond any doubt, kusala as kusala and akusala as akusala. By seeing it – he recognizes it. He doesn’t need to hold or adopt any other external criteria. The clarity of his vision pertains to here and now, internally. Thus, for someone who hasn’t achieved that yet, that’s where the meditation should start. Obtaining of the Right criteria and then meditating through it. Keeping it “composed” is the definition of the Right samadhi.

The problem is that this kind of instruction is very non-specific. People today usually need something more proliferated and palpable. They require meditation “methods”. An average man today wants a “recipe”, a prescription of “steps”. He needs to know what exactly he should do, that would then automatically result in his liberation. Unfortunately, it doesn’t work like that. If we look at the Suttas, whenever the Buddha was talking about meditation it was to bring the fulfilment of knowledge and wisdom. Yet, if a person has none of the latter to begin with, then the fulfilment cannot arise nor be fabricated mechanically. Very often the Buddha’s reply on how to meditate would be in instructing people in recognizing and avoiding the unskilful, and cultivating (bhavana) of the skilful. Discerning the nature of kusala and akusala has the potential of taking the mind above both. Freeing it from action (kamma) and it’s results (vipaka), since they are bound to the domain of skilful and unskilful. And that’s exactly why performing (doing or acting) of the specific steps, cannot take one beyond the nature of kamma. Understanding it however, might.

Furthermore, methods and techniques usually don’t amount to more than management of the problem of suffering. Management of something cannot actually uproot that very thing. So, instead of that, a person will be better of in trying to discern what kind of attitude towards meditation can be sustained throughout the day. An attitude that wouldn’t need any particular favorable environment or special conditions to be applied in. Regardless of whether one is sitting in a full lotus posture, or just walking down the street........
auto
Posts: 4584
Joined: Thu Dec 21, 2017 12:02 pm

Re: The causes for wisdom

Post by auto »

robertk wrote: Tue Jan 29, 2019 4:25 am I looked over a website retro linked to today and thought this section, although I don't agree with all of it, was pertinent to this thread:
http://www.hillsidehermitage.org/intent ... s-actions/ by Ajahn Nyanamoli Thero
Right meditation is inseparable from the Right view. That means that even if a person doesn’t have the Right view, their meditation should be concerned about getting it. To put it simply – it comes down to developing the self-transparency (or self-honesty) concerning skilful as skilful (kusala) and unskilful as unskilful (akusala). The Buddha defined the Right view in those very terms – knowing “good as good”, and “bad as bad”. The person with the Right view knows for oneself, beyond any doubt, kusala as kusala and akusala as akusala. By seeing it – he recognizes it. He doesn’t need to hold or adopt any other external criteria. The clarity of his vision pertains to here and now, internally. Thus, for someone who hasn’t achieved that yet, that’s where the meditation should start. Obtaining of the Right criteria and then meditating through it. Keeping it “composed” is the definition of the Right samadhi.
knowing "good as good". Imo it refers to good as mundane and the other good as dhamma. Earth as earth mean you have dhamma knowledge over earth, mundane knowledge has pathways through body included as you are chained to use body to gain knowledge.
Hence what is seen there is no self in between or no self in the seen, it refer to the self what is not only a mere notion or convention of self it means more..one is chained to clinging to khandhas to fulfill conditions for knowledge to arise. It is arhant who can do nothing regards to the things arisen and gain knowledge because of already seen passing away of that particular thing.
Mindfulness really is 3rd jhana thing which means vacisakharas have been ceased and one can grasp the sampajanna which is knowing about what is going on and no need to get involved.

"By seeing it – he recognizes it" that is related to 'seeing at night', as eyes originally are blind the function of seeing is activated by the light what is coming from the heart.
User avatar
robertk
Posts: 5613
Joined: Sat Jan 03, 2009 2:08 am

Re: The causes for wisdom

Post by robertk »

Bhikkhu Bodhi , introduction to the All Embracing net of Views

The Brahmajāla Sutta is the first sutta of the Dīgha Nikāya, the first of
the five nikāyas or collections of the Buddha’s discourses making up
the Sutta Piṭaka of the Pā¿i Canon....
The paramount importance of the Brahmajāla in the context of
Buddhist thought springs from the very nature of the Buddha’s
teaching—from its aim and from the methodology it employs to
actualize that aim....

In its rudimentary form, as an intellectual acceptance of the
doctrine taught by the Buddha, wisdom provides the impetus for an
evolving process of meditative cultivation that will transmute this
intellectual view into direct vision. Thus, in the exposition of the
Noble Eightfold Path, right view (sammādiṭṭhi) comes first. From right
view spring all the remaining factors of the path, culminating in right
knowledge and right emancipation. But in order that this embryo of
correct understanding might come to proper growth it is necessary at
the outset to clear away the host of wrong views, false beliefs, and
dogmatic convictions that threaten its development at every turn.
Therefore, as the forerunner of the path, the first task of right view,
which must be accomplished before it can even begin its more
demanding chores, is to discriminate between right and wrong views.
As the Buddha explains: “Right view, bhikkhus, is the forerunner
(pubbaṅgama). And how is right view the forerunner? If one
understands wrong view as wrong view and understands right view as
right view, that is right view” (MN 117.4).
Right view and wrong view each operates on two levels, one
regarding the nature of actuality and the other regarding doctrines
about the nature of actuality. Right view is able both to understand the
nature of actuality and to discriminate between right and wrong
doctrines about the nature of actuality. Wrong view both confuses the
nature of actuality and cannot distinguish between right and wrong
doctrines about the nature of actuality. Only when right view prevails
will the correct discrimination between right and wrong view be made.
So long as wrong view prevails, their distinction will remain unseen,
right view will be unable to exercise its higher functions, and the
development of the remaining path factors will be impaired.
In order to develop right view, wrong views must be eliminated,
and in order to eliminate them it is necessary to know what they are.
For this purpose, throughout the suttas the Buddha has taken special
4 The All-Embracing Net of Views
care to explain the different guises wrong view may assume and to
point out its dangers. The wrong views mentioned by the Buddha can
be classified into three general categories: wrong views with fixed
consequences (niyatamicchādiṭṭhi), speculative views (diṭṭhigata), and
personality view (sakkāyadiṭṭhi).
Wrong views with fixed consequences are doctrines that tend to
undermine the basic principles of morality by denying the framework
which gives meaning and validity to ethical notions. They include
kinds of ethical nihilism that reject the law of kamma, the reality of
moral qualities, or the efficacy of effort. Their consequences are said
to be “fixed” because the firm adherence to these views is an
unwholesome course of kamma obstructing the paths both to the
heavenly worlds and to liberation; in some cases, where such
adherence is especially rabid and dogmatic, the kamma generated is
sufficient to bring a fall from the human world down to the planes of
misery.
Speculative views include all metaphysical theories, religious
creeds, and philosophical tenets concerning issues that lie beyond the
reach of possible experiential verification. These views are not
necessarily an obstacle to rebirth in the higher worlds, but in every
case act as impediments to the path to liberation. All such views arise
out of the personality view, the fundamental belief in a self or egoentity
which, as the root of its more sophisticated philosophical
elaborations, is reckoned separately.
User avatar
robertk
Posts: 5613
Joined: Sat Jan 03, 2009 2:08 am

Re: The causes for wisdom

Post by robertk »

I know that it is better to nap than to meditate while sleep deprived, but if one is not in a position where it is possible to nap, isn't it better to practice mindfulness despite not being in an optimal state to do so?
I saw the above on another thread and it relates to one of the initial triggers for this long thread - i.e. what I believe is a misunderstanding of what sati (in the context of satipatthana) is.

In a nutshell, as I see it, Sati is merely a momentary conditioned element. No real optimal or non-optimal time - it will arise if conditions are present.
And what really hinders the arising of satipatthana; satisampajanna, is subtle wrong views that suttas like the Brahamjala sutta bring out (see the previous post for an intro by ven. Bodhi.)
User avatar
robertk
Posts: 5613
Joined: Sat Jan 03, 2009 2:08 am

Re: The causes for wisdom

Post by robertk »

The English translation is from ven. Bodhi's translation, p141, to the Brahmajala sutta and is from the tika.


Moreover, there are two kinds of characteristics pertaining to

ultimately real dhammas (paramatthadhamma): (1) the characteristic

of the specific nature (sabhāvalakkhaṇa); and (2) the general

characteristic (sāmaññalakkhaṇa).68 The comprehension of the

characteristic of the specific nature is direct experiential knowledge

(paccakkhañāṇa); the comprehension of the general characteristic is

inferential knowledge (anumānañāṇa). Scripture, as the means for

acquiring wisdom born of learning (sutamayī paññā), issues only in

inferential knowledge. But by considering the things learned, one

becomes established in reflective acquiescence, gives rise to the

wisdom born of reflection (cintāmayī paññā), and by meditative

development (bhāvanā) gradually achieves direct experiential

knowledge.69


35.‘‘. Kiñca bhiyyo duvidhaṃ lakkhaṇaṃ paramatthadhammānaṃ sabhāvalakkhaṇaṃ sāmaññalakkhaṇañcāti. Tattha sabhāvalakkhaṇāvabodho paccakkhañāṇaṃ, sāmaññalakkhaṇāvabodho anumānañāṇaṃ, āgamo ca sutamayāya paññāya sādhanato anumānañāṇameva āvahati, sutānaṃ pana dhammānaṃ ākāraparivitakkanena nijjhānakkhantiyaṃ ṭhito cintāmayaṃ paññaṃ nibbattetvā anukkamena bhāvanāya paccakkhañāṇaṃ adhigacchatīti evaṃ āgamopi takkavisayaṃ nātikkamatīti taggahaṇena gahitovāti veditabbo.
User avatar
Alex123
Posts: 4035
Joined: Wed Mar 10, 2010 11:32 pm

Re: The causes for wisdom

Post by Alex123 »

robertk wrote: Wed Jan 23, 2013 6:37 pm The main point is that hearing/studying Dhamma is essential for right view to develop. If one does not learn the theory accurately and in sufficient depth then it is sure that one will either make no progess or progess in a wrong direction. These wrong directions can be very enticing and have the outward appearance of correctness. One may live a more serene and law-abiding life but be as deluded about the way out of samsara as ever.
This is assumed that "right" view is some sort of academic subject that you "study and pass the written test with 100% score".

What if the right "view" a mostly a procedural, non-declarative skill? This would make sense, because otherwise we would have serious problems with rebirth. Example: Imagine if one became a sotapanna and knew only one language (lets say, English, for example). What would happen if one would be reborn somewhere/sometime where there wouldn't be any English language around? In which language would reborn sotapanna "declare" right views?


In my experience I have noticed that I can say all the "Right" things, quote all the "Right" sources - and yet behave like I have self-view. Self view is non-declarative thing, so it cannot be uprooted with declarative statements. It looks like right practice is the way to go. You can't learn to ride a bike by reading about it. IMHO.
Ontheway
Posts: 3062
Joined: Wed Aug 11, 2021 3:35 pm

Re: The causes for wisdom

Post by Ontheway »

robertk wrote: Tue Apr 06, 2021 2:59 pm The English translation is from ven. Bodhi's translation, p141, to the Brahmajala sutta and is from the tika.


Moreover, there are two kinds of characteristics pertaining to

ultimately real dhammas (paramatthadhamma): (1) the characteristic

of the specific nature (sabhāvalakkhaṇa); and (2) the general

characteristic (sāmaññalakkhaṇa).68 The comprehension of the

characteristic of the specific nature is direct experiential knowledge

(paccakkhañāṇa); the comprehension of the general characteristic is

inferential knowledge (anumānañāṇa). Scripture, as the means for

acquiring wisdom born of learning (sutamayī paññā), issues only in

inferential knowledge. But by considering the things learned, one

becomes established in reflective acquiescence, gives rise to the

wisdom born of reflection (cintāmayī paññā), and by meditative

development (bhāvanā) gradually achieves direct experiential

knowledge.69


35.‘‘. Kiñca bhiyyo duvidhaṃ lakkhaṇaṃ paramatthadhammānaṃ sabhāvalakkhaṇaṃ sāmaññalakkhaṇañcāti. Tattha sabhāvalakkhaṇāvabodho paccakkhañāṇaṃ, sāmaññalakkhaṇāvabodho anumānañāṇaṃ, āgamo ca sutamayāya paññāya sādhanato anumānañāṇameva āvahati, sutānaṃ pana dhammānaṃ ākāraparivitakkanena nijjhānakkhantiyaṃ ṭhito cintāmayaṃ paññaṃ nibbattetvā anukkamena bhāvanāya paccakkhañāṇaṃ adhigacchatīti evaṃ āgamopi takkavisayaṃ nātikkamatīti taggahaṇena gahitovāti veditabbo.
:goodpost:
Association with people of integrity is a factor for stream-entry.
Listening to the true Dhamma is a factor for stream-entry.
Appropriate attention is a factor for stream-entry.
Practice in accordance with the Dhamma is a factor for stream-entry.
— SN 55.5
Better don't be lazy, listen to the true Dhamma and learn by heart for further practice :reading:
Hiriottappasampannā,
sukkadhammasamāhitā;
Santo sappurisā loke,
devadhammāti vuccare.

https://suttacentral.net/ja6/en/chalmer ... ight=false
User avatar
robertk
Posts: 5613
Joined: Sat Jan 03, 2009 2:08 am

Re: The causes for wisdom

Post by robertk »

Alex123 wrote: Sat Dec 04, 2021 12:57 pm
robertk wrote: Wed Jan 23, 2013 6:37 pm The main point is that hearing/studying Dhamma is essential for right view to develop. If one does not learn the theory accurately and in sufficient depth then it is sure that one will either make no progess or progess in a wrong direction. These wrong directions can be very enticing and have the outward appearance of correctness. One may live a more serene and law-abiding life but be as deluded about the way out of samsara as ever.
This is assumed that "right" view is some sort of academic subject that you "study and pass the written test with 100% score".

What if the right "view" a mostly a procedural, non-declarative skill? This would make sense, because otherwise we would have serious problems with rebirth. Example: Imagine if one became a sotapanna and knew only one language (lets say, English, for example). What would happen if one would be reborn somewhere/sometime where there wouldn't be any English language around? In which language would reborn sotapanna "declare" right views?


In my experience I have noticed that I can say all the "Right" things, quote all the "Right" sources - and yet behave like I have self-view. Self view is non-declarative thing, so it cannot be uprooted with declarative statements. It looks like right practice is the way to go. You can't learn to ride a bike by reading about it. IMHO.
All very gradual Alex.
see the post above by ontheway - the underlined piece.

Not so easy it seems to understand even at the level of pariyatti -otherwise why do we see such divergent opinions on so many suttas..
User avatar
Alex123
Posts: 4035
Joined: Wed Mar 10, 2010 11:32 pm

Re: The causes for wisdom

Post by Alex123 »

robertk wrote: Sat Dec 04, 2021 1:19 pm All very gradual Alex.
Of course it is gradual.
Not so easy it seems to understand even at the level of pariyatti -otherwise why do we see such divergent opinions on so many suttas..
Exactly. It is difficult to understand, so some people try an easy way out. That is natural, to try to avoid difficulty and go for an "easier" way out.
Post Reply