something endures unchanged for at least a certain interval

An open and inclusive investigation into Buddhism and spiritual cultivation

Re: something endures unchanged for at least a certain interval

Postby BlackBird » Tue Oct 26, 2010 11:05 am

Sanghamitta wrote:Ok feel free to remove Retro.
Personally I would would have great reservations about casting a suicide into the role of mentor, but there we are. I think that act removes all credibility just as if he had murdered someone else.


Weren't you cautioning me a few threads back about passing judgement on things I hadn't read? As Retro said, there's a number of examples of Ariyas committing suicide in the Nikayas. Guess you would have great reservations about listening to said Ariyas too? Would you lump those good fellows in with the murderers also?
"And so, because this Teaching is so different from what Westerners are accustomed to, they will try to adapt the Teaching to their own framework. What they need to learn to do is not to adapt the Teaching to their own point of view but to adapt their own point of view to the Teaching. This is called saddhá, or faith, and it means giving oneself to the Teaching even if the Teaching is contrary to one’s own preconceived notions of the way things are."- Ven Bodhesako

Nanavira Thera's teachings - An existential approach to the Dhamma | Ven. Bodhesako's essay on anicca
User avatar
BlackBird
 
Posts: 1815
Joined: Fri Apr 17, 2009 12:07 pm
Location: New Zealand

Re: something endures unchanged for at least a certain interval

Postby Nyana » Tue Oct 26, 2010 6:56 pm

Sobeh wrote:IMO he did.

Hi Sobeh,

Ven. Ñāṇavīra was one of the first people in a very long time to question the authority and validity of the received commentarial tradition. IMO this was intellectually honest and necessary. He offered much in order to begin to clear the path. But it was just a beginning. He wasn't always 100% correct and his approach and writing style are not straightforward. A diligent, disinterested practitioner can accept Ven. Ñāṇavīra's pioneering contributions while also seeing that it's now possible to approach the dhamma even more directly.

All the best,

Geoff
Nyana
 
Posts: 2229
Joined: Tue Apr 27, 2010 11:56 am

Re: something endures unchanged for at least a certain interval

Postby Sobeh » Tue Oct 26, 2010 7:15 pm

tiltbillings wrote:Let me ask: is Nanavira advocating that something endures unchanged for at least a certain interval?


Panha Sutta (AN 4.42) wrote:"There are these four ways of answering questions. Which four? There are questions that should be answered categorically [straightforwardly yes, no, this, that]. There are questions that should be answered with an analytical (qualified) answer [defining or redefining the terms]. There are questions that should be answered with a counter-question. There are questions that should be put aside. These are the four ways of answering questions."


Your question needs an analytic answer. Nanavira does not claim that something per se endures unchanged for at least a certain interval. That you continue to ask the question in this way reflects a somewhat slavish commitment to the phrase in the letter as opposed to the content of the idea. Nanavira claims that enduring unchanged for at least a certain interval is a certain experience set of a certain level of generality. Anything we experience as a something is a certain experience set of a certain level of generality. The word "certain" reflects a strong commitment to the relational aspect of this fundamental structure, as opposed to an imputed temporal one (which is not asserted - perception of time is based on perception of change, and not the other way 'round).

Ñāṇa wrote:...it's now possible to approach the dhamma even more directly.


It's the "even more directly" comparative frame of reference which is out of place; it is a subjective evaluation being conveyed as if it were objectively determined.
User avatar
Sobeh
 
Posts: 329
Joined: Tue Mar 16, 2010 3:35 am
Location: Salt Lake City, UT, US

Re: something endures unchanged for at least a certain interval

Postby retrofuturist » Tue Oct 26, 2010 10:21 pm

Greetings,

Please note, a few posts have been split off to a new topic...

Are ariyas a later addition to the Dhamma?
viewtopic.php?f=16&t=6086

Metta,
Retro. :)
If you have asked me of the origination of unease, then I shall explain it to you in accordance with my understanding:
Whatever various forms of unease there are in the world, They originate founded in encumbering accumulation. (Pārāyanavagga)


Exalted in mind, just open and clearly aware, the recluse trained in the ways of the sages:
One who is such, calmed and ever mindful, He has no sorrows! -- Udana IV, 7


Dharma Wheel (Mahayana / Vajrayana forum) -- Open flower ~ Open book (blog)
User avatar
retrofuturist
Site Admin
 
Posts: 14517
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 9:52 pm
Location: Melbourne, Australia

Re: something endures unchanged for at least a certain interval

Postby Nyana » Tue Oct 26, 2010 11:01 pm

Sobeh wrote:
Ñāṇa wrote:...it's now possible to approach the dhamma even more directly.


It's the "even more directly" comparative frame of reference which is out of place; it is a subjective evaluation being conveyed as if it were objectively determined.

It's a subjective evaluation being conveyed as a subjective evaluation.

Moreover, it's a subjective evaluation which considers the dhamma interpreted through western philosophy and symbolic logic to be far less direct, less practical, and less skillful than the dhamma unencumbered by such unnecessary intellectual head trips.

All the best,

Geoff
Nyana
 
Posts: 2229
Joined: Tue Apr 27, 2010 11:56 am

Re: something endures unchanged for at least a certain interval

Postby alan » Wed Oct 27, 2010 3:44 am

Are the Commentaries not subjective?
Seems like a lot of head trips there, too.
I don't pretend to get everything he writes. But I can't easily dismiss it.
alan
 
Posts: 2438
Joined: Wed Sep 30, 2009 12:14 am
Location: Miramar beach, Fl.

Re: something endures unchanged for at least a certain interval

Postby tiltbillings » Wed Oct 27, 2010 4:33 am

Sobeh wrote:
tiltbillings wrote:Let me ask: is Nanavira advocating that something endures unchanged for at least a certain interval?


Panha Sutta (AN 4.42) wrote:"There are these four ways of answering questions. Which four? There are questions that should be answered categorically [straightforwardly yes, no, this, that]. There are questions that should be answered with an analytical (qualified) answer [defining or redefining the terms]. There are questions that should be answered with a counter-question. There are questions that should be put aside. These are the four ways of answering questions."


Your question needs an analytic answer. Nanavira does not claim that something per se endures unchanged for at least a certain interval. That you continue to ask the question in this way reflects a somewhat slavish commitment to the phrase in the letter as opposed to the content of the idea.
Then obviously Nanavira is not particularly adept at expressing his ideas. I am simply reading the text of what he wrote as it is written, and I see no reason from how Nanavira wrote what he wrote not to take what he has written as it is written. If he meant to say something else, then he should have said something else.

I have yet to see anyone here tell us what the "something" is and what exactly it means that it is "unchanged" for an "interval," what ever that might mean in this context. So far, and this is so in what follows, we get a lot of bouncing around of these words and some rather ill defined ideas, but no clarity.

Nanavira claims that enduring unchanged for at least a certain interval is a certain experience set of a certain level of generality.
Huh? And you make my point by reflecting Nanavira by saying something that sounds like it is saying something but says very little, if anything, indeed.

Anything we experience as a something is a certain experience set of a certain level of generality. The word "certain" reflects a strong commitment to the relational aspect of this fundamental structure, as opposed to an imputed temporal one (which is not asserted - perception of time is based on perception of change, and not the other way 'round).
Again, this really explains nothing.

You might want to try it again in clear, concise English, and maybe we can see if Nanavira actually said something here that makes any sense.
This being is bound to samsara, kamma is his means for going beyond.
SN I, 38.

Ar scáth a chéile a mhaireas na daoine.
People live in one another’s shelter.
"We eat cold eels and think distant thoughts." -- Jack Johnson
User avatar
tiltbillings
 
Posts: 18349
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2008 9:25 am
Location: Turtle Island

Re: something endures unchanged for at least a certain interval

Postby Dmytro » Wed Oct 27, 2010 6:50 am

Hi,

As Buddha said, the body exists for decades:

"It would be better for the uninstructed run-of-the-mill person to hold to the body composed of the four great elements, rather than the mind, as the self. Why is that? Because this body composed of the four great elements is seen standing for a year, two years, three, four, five, ten, twenty, thirty, forty, fifty, a hundred years or more. But what's called 'mind,' 'intellect,' or 'consciousness' by day and by night arises as one thing and ceases as another. Just as a monkey, swinging through a forest wilderness, grabs a branch. Letting go of it, it grabs another branch. Letting go of that, it grabs another one. Letting go of that, it grabs another one. In the same way, what's called 'mind,' 'intellect,' or 'consciousness' by day and by night arises as one thing and ceases as another.

— Assutavā-sutta (SN 12.61)
http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka ... .than.html

Dmytro
User avatar
Dmytro
 
Posts: 1161
Joined: Thu Jan 01, 2009 7:24 pm
Location: Kyiv, Ukraine

Re: something endures unchanged for at least a certain interval

Postby tiltbillings » Wed Oct 27, 2010 6:56 am

Dmytro wrote:Hi,

As Buddha said, the body exists for decades:

"It would be better for the uninstructed run-of-the-mill person to hold to the body composed of the four great elements, rather than the mind, as the self. Why is that? Because this body composed of the four great elements is seen standing for a year, two years, three, four, five, ten, twenty, thirty, forty, fifty, a hundred years or more. But what's called 'mind,' 'intellect,' or 'consciousness' by day and by night arises as one thing and ceases as another. Just as a monkey, swinging through a forest wilderness, grabs a branch. Letting go of it, it grabs another branch. Letting go of that, it grabs another one. Letting go of that, it grabs another one. In the same way, what's called 'mind,' 'intellect,' or 'consciousness' by day and by night arises as one thing and ceases as another.

— Assutavā-sutta (SN 12.61)
http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka ... .than.html

Dmytro
Which is the third time this text has been quoted, but, of course, the body does not "exist" unchanged, even from this moment to the next, when seen with vipassana.
This being is bound to samsara, kamma is his means for going beyond.
SN I, 38.

Ar scáth a chéile a mhaireas na daoine.
People live in one another’s shelter.
"We eat cold eels and think distant thoughts." -- Jack Johnson
User avatar
tiltbillings
 
Posts: 18349
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2008 9:25 am
Location: Turtle Island

Re: something endures unchanged for at least a certain interval

Postby Spiny O'Norman » Wed Oct 27, 2010 9:55 am

Dmytro wrote:Hi,

As Buddha said, the body exists for decades:
— Assutavā-sutta (SN 12.61)
http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka ... .than.html


I think the point of this is that the mind changes much more quickly than the body.
Generally what I've found helpful is the reflection that there are no things, only processes.

Spiny
User avatar
Spiny O'Norman
 
Posts: 851
Joined: Sat May 23, 2009 8:46 am
Location: Suffolk, England

Re: something endures unchanged for at least a certain interval

Postby 5heaps » Wed Oct 27, 2010 10:51 am

tiltbillings wrote:I have yet to see anyone here tell us what the "something" is and what exactly it means that it is "unchanged" for an "interval," what ever that might mean in this context. So far, and this is so in what follows, we get a lot of bouncing around of these words and some rather ill defined ideas, but no clarity.
if a thing were not momentary then it could not be subject to arising, abiding, aging and disintegration. that you yourself get out of this by appealing to some unmentioned idea of designation is irrelevant.

it is therefore "unchanging" in the sense that it reserves its main characteristic nature momentarily as it is undergoing the subtlest form of change. is it technically unchanging, no, because if it were nothing could impact it not even impermanence.

if you find something wrong with this identify the problem and explain it using your system.

Sanghamitta wrote:attempts to smuggle Vajrayana concepts under the wire led me some time ago to conclude that i was not inclined to take your critique of the Theravada with any degree of seriousness.
1. who is critiquing Thervada? i am explaing momentariness. if anything, Tilt's stuff about designation and bringing in Nagarjuna is a critique.
2. i havent brought in emptiness once and have no desire to. youd have to seriously wrestle it out of me.
A Japanese man has been arrested on suspicion of writing a computer virus that destroys and replaces files on a victim PC with manga images of squid, octopuses and sea urchins. Masato Nakatsuji, 27, of Izumisano, Osaka Prefecture, was quoted as telling police: "I wanted to see how much my computer programming skills had improved since the last time I was arrested."
5heaps
 
Posts: 334
Joined: Wed Dec 16, 2009 12:19 am

Re: something endures unchanged for at least a certain interval

Postby beeblebrox » Wed Oct 27, 2010 4:18 pm

tiltbillings wrote:
Dmytro wrote:Hi,

As Buddha said, the body exists for decades:

"It would be better for the uninstructed run-of-the-mill person to hold to the body composed of the four great elements, rather than the mind, as the self. Why is that? Because this body composed of the four great elements is seen standing for a year, two years, three, four, five, ten, twenty, thirty, forty, fifty, a hundred years or more. But what's called 'mind,' 'intellect,' or 'consciousness' by day and by night arises as one thing and ceases as another. Just as a monkey, swinging through a forest wilderness, grabs a branch. Letting go of it, it grabs another branch. Letting go of that, it grabs another one. Letting go of that, it grabs another one. In the same way, what's called 'mind,' 'intellect,' or 'consciousness' by day and by night arises as one thing and ceases as another.

— Assutavā-sutta (SN 12.61)
http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka ... .than.html

Dmytro
Which is the third time this text has been quoted, but, of course, the body does not "exist" unchanged, even from this moment to the next, when seen with vipassana.


Are you saying that you're now continually perceiving your body to change (along with others)... all the time? Or just during vipassana?

If it's the latter... then aren't you clinging to your own experience from that? Especially during those times when it's obvious that you're perceiving this body (or at least parts of it, such as bones, say) not to change, for even a moment?

This seems like avijjā. By the way, I don't think that the word "ignorance" is really a good translation for it... it has the wrong connotations. I think avijjā is more like "the act of ignoring." You're focused on one thing, while "ignoring" this other side that goes against the thing. (Or missing it, if you're doing this unknowingly.) That is exactly what it seems like you've been doing here... which leads to suffering. (Of course.)

So, stop ignoring the stuff that you've yourself been perceiving (via sañña), especially when you've stopped perceiving something (such as when the changing state ends; which (this state), again, is not the same as anicca). Whether you've been doing this unintentionally or not --- this D.O. thing has already been pointed out by the Buddha... so, right now you really have no excuse.
User avatar
beeblebrox
 
Posts: 805
Joined: Thu Dec 31, 2009 10:41 pm

Re: something endures unchanged for at least a certain interval

Postby tiltbillings » Wed Oct 27, 2010 4:49 pm

beeblebrox wrote:
tiltbillings wrote:
Dmytro wrote:Hi,

As Buddha said, the body exists for decades:

"It would be better for the uninstructed run-of-the-mill person to hold to the body composed of the four great elements, rather than the mind, as the self. Why is that? Because this body composed of the four great elements is seen standing for a year, two years, three, four, five, ten, twenty, thirty, forty, fifty, a hundred years or more. But what's called 'mind,' 'intellect,' or 'consciousness' by day and by night arises as one thing and ceases as another. Just as a monkey, swinging through a forest wilderness, grabs a branch. Letting go of it, it grabs another branch. Letting go of that, it grabs another one. Letting go of that, it grabs another one. In the same way, what's called 'mind,' 'intellect,' or 'consciousness' by day and by night arises as one thing and ceases as another.

— Assutavā-sutta (SN 12.61)
http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka ... .than.html

Dmytro
Which is the third time this text has been quoted, but, of course, the body does not "exist" unchanged, even from this moment to the next, when seen with vipassana.


Are you saying that you're now continually perceiving your body to change (along with others)... all the time? Or just during vipassana?
It is an irrelavant question to the OP and the rest of it makes no sense.
This being is bound to samsara, kamma is his means for going beyond.
SN I, 38.

Ar scáth a chéile a mhaireas na daoine.
People live in one another’s shelter.
"We eat cold eels and think distant thoughts." -- Jack Johnson
User avatar
tiltbillings
 
Posts: 18349
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2008 9:25 am
Location: Turtle Island

Re: something endures unchanged for at least a certain interval

Postby tiltbillings » Wed Oct 27, 2010 5:12 pm

5heaps wrote:
tiltbillings wrote:I have yet to see anyone here tell us what the "something" is and what exactly it means that it is "unchanged" for an "interval," what ever that might mean in this context. So far, and this is so in what follows, we get a lot of bouncing around of these words and some rather ill defined ideas, but no clarity.
if a thing were not momentary then it could not be subject to arising, abiding, aging and disintegration. that you yourself get out of this by appealing to some unmentioned idea of designation is irrelevant.

it is therefore "unchanging" in the sense that it reserves its main characteristic nature momentarily as it is undergoing the subtlest form of change. is it technically unchanging, no, because if it were nothing could impact it not even impermanence.

if you find something wrong with this identify the problem and explain it using your system.
if a thing were not momentary I have no idea of what you are talking about.
This being is bound to samsara, kamma is his means for going beyond.
SN I, 38.

Ar scáth a chéile a mhaireas na daoine.
People live in one another’s shelter.
"We eat cold eels and think distant thoughts." -- Jack Johnson
User avatar
tiltbillings
 
Posts: 18349
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2008 9:25 am
Location: Turtle Island

Re: something endures unchanged for at least a certain interval

Postby tiltbillings » Wed Oct 27, 2010 5:24 pm

Spiny O'Norman wrote:
Dmytro wrote:Hi,

As Buddha said, the body exists for decades:
— Assutavā-sutta (SN 12.61)
http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka ... .than.html


I think the point of this is that the mind changes much more quickly than the body.
Generally what I've found helpful is the reflection that there are no things, only processes.
Agreed. If we must hang onto something, thinking it is a our "self," the body seems more reasonable becausae it give the appearance and sense of not changing, whereas the mind is constanly going from this to that. Your conclusion is to the point.

But the question of the OP: what is Nanavira referring to as something endures unchanged for at least a certain interval?
This being is bound to samsara, kamma is his means for going beyond.
SN I, 38.

Ar scáth a chéile a mhaireas na daoine.
People live in one another’s shelter.
"We eat cold eels and think distant thoughts." -- Jack Johnson
User avatar
tiltbillings
 
Posts: 18349
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2008 9:25 am
Location: Turtle Island

Re: something endures unchanged for at least a certain interval

Postby 5heaps » Wed Oct 27, 2010 6:18 pm

tiltbillings wrote:if a thing were not momentary I have no idea of what you are talking about.
do you not accept dependent arising? do you not accept characteristic natures? do you not accept that they perform functions?

if you do, you have to accept that they exist in some substantial manner. if you dont accept that they do, what then does 'they' refer to? what is it that functions if a thing is already gone simultaneous with its production?

"there are no things, only processes" makes no sense, since processes are by definition made up of parts (things).
A Japanese man has been arrested on suspicion of writing a computer virus that destroys and replaces files on a victim PC with manga images of squid, octopuses and sea urchins. Masato Nakatsuji, 27, of Izumisano, Osaka Prefecture, was quoted as telling police: "I wanted to see how much my computer programming skills had improved since the last time I was arrested."
5heaps
 
Posts: 334
Joined: Wed Dec 16, 2009 12:19 am

Re: something endures unchanged for at least a certain interval

Postby tiltbillings » Wed Oct 27, 2010 6:22 pm

5heaps wrote:
tiltbillings wrote:if a thing were not momentary I have no idea of what you are talking about.
do you not accept dependent arising? do you not accept characteristic natures? do you not accept that they perform functions?

if you do, you have to accept that they exist in some substantial manner. if you dont accept that they do, what then does 'they' refer to? what is it that functions if a thing is already gone simultaneous with its production?

"there are no things, only processes" makes no sense, since processes are by definition made up of parts (things).
Still have no idea as to what you are talking about.
This being is bound to samsara, kamma is his means for going beyond.
SN I, 38.

Ar scáth a chéile a mhaireas na daoine.
People live in one another’s shelter.
"We eat cold eels and think distant thoughts." -- Jack Johnson
User avatar
tiltbillings
 
Posts: 18349
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2008 9:25 am
Location: Turtle Island

Re: something endures unchanged for at least a certain interval

Postby beeblebrox » Wed Oct 27, 2010 6:32 pm

tiltbillings wrote:Still have no idea as to what you are talking about.

You'll probably say this is also irrelevant to the thread... but that sounds like a poor state to be in. :thinking: Get yourself out of it. You're fixating on things that apparently isn't giving you any insight...
User avatar
beeblebrox
 
Posts: 805
Joined: Thu Dec 31, 2009 10:41 pm

Re: something endures unchanged for at least a certain interval

Postby 5heaps » Wed Oct 27, 2010 6:33 pm

tiltbillings wrote:
5heaps wrote:
tiltbillings wrote:if a thing were not momentary I have no idea of what you are talking about.
do you not accept dependent arising? do you not accept characteristic natures? do you not accept that they perform functions?

if you do, you have to accept that they exist in some substantial manner. if you dont accept that they do, what then does 'they' refer to? what is it that functions if a thing is already gone simultaneous with its production?

"there are no things, only processes" makes no sense, since processes are by definition made up of parts (things).
Still have no idea as to what you are talking about.
i see. you understand perfectly the things that are contradictory by nature (ie. "there are no things only processes"), but then fail to understand things which make sense (ie. if moments dont exist then production and cessation are simultaneous)

as for the meaning of the word, one description of moment is the minimum duration of time in which an action can complete. another description is 'the shortest instant of time'.
A Japanese man has been arrested on suspicion of writing a computer virus that destroys and replaces files on a victim PC with manga images of squid, octopuses and sea urchins. Masato Nakatsuji, 27, of Izumisano, Osaka Prefecture, was quoted as telling police: "I wanted to see how much my computer programming skills had improved since the last time I was arrested."
5heaps
 
Posts: 334
Joined: Wed Dec 16, 2009 12:19 am

Re: something endures unchanged for at least a certain interval

Postby tiltbillings » Wed Oct 27, 2010 6:36 pm

beeblebrox wrote:
tiltbillings wrote:Still have no idea as to what you are talking about.

You'll probably say this is also irrelevant to the thread... but that sounds like a poor state to be in. :thinking: Get yourself out of it. You're fixating on things that apparently isn't giving you any insight...
Why are you making this personal? What is being talked about here are ideas, not personal stuff. You seem to want to make this about me. That is more than off topic.
This being is bound to samsara, kamma is his means for going beyond.
SN I, 38.

Ar scáth a chéile a mhaireas na daoine.
People live in one another’s shelter.
"We eat cold eels and think distant thoughts." -- Jack Johnson
User avatar
tiltbillings
 
Posts: 18349
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2008 9:25 am
Location: Turtle Island

PreviousNext

Return to Open Dhamma

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: appicchato, Crazy cloud, fivebells, Kasina, Shaswata_Panja and 8 guests