Nibbana

A forum for beginners and members of other Buddhist traditions to ask questions about Theravāda (The Way of the Elders). Responses require moderator approval before they are visible.

Re: Nibbana

Postby retrofuturist » Wed Feb 04, 2009 11:45 pm

Greetings,

Element wrote:The Third Noble Truth is about dukkha nirodha. 'Nirodha' here is permanent nirodha (as distinct from atungkama). The Buddha has said this dukkha nirodha is to be 'realised'. To 'realise' something requires a mind. Realisation or experience cannot occur when there are no aggregates. Therefore, the Mahavihara retort is not in accord to the Lord Buddha's teaching itself.

Further, in the Third Noble Truth, the Lord Buddha has advised dukkha nirodha is solely the cessation of craving. Again, the Mahavihara retort is not in accord to the Lord Buddha's teaching itself.

:goodpost:

Well said, Mahadhatu. I look forward to seeing the Mahavihara retort to that.

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: 14521
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 9:52 pm
Location: Melbourne, Australia

Re: Nibbana

Postby tiltbillings » Thu Feb 05, 2009 12:35 am

Well said, Mahadhatu. I look forward to seeing the Mahavihara retort to that.


A retort:
Image
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: 18354
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2008 9:25 am
Location: Turtle Island

Re: Nibbana

Postby mikenz66 » Thu Feb 05, 2009 3:10 am

Dear Tilt,
tiltbillings wrote:A retort: ...

Are you sure that's a Mahavihara retort? It looks rather modern to me.

Mike
User avatar
mikenz66
 
Posts: 9612
Joined: Sat Jan 10, 2009 7:37 am
Location: New Zealand

Re: Nibbana

Postby tiltbillings » Thu Feb 05, 2009 3:21 am

An less modern, but surely an orthodox, retort:

Image
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: 18354
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2008 9:25 am
Location: Turtle Island

Re: Nibbana

Postby cooran » Thu Feb 05, 2009 7:59 am

Hello Tilt and Retro,

I really don't understand the pictures - what they are and what they mean - and I'm sure I can't be the only one. Could you explain, please, what they are and the significance of them in this thread (seriously)?

metta
Chris
---The trouble is that you think you have time---
---It's not what happens to you in life that is important ~ it's what you do with it ---
User avatar
cooran
 
Posts: 7055
Joined: Tue Jan 06, 2009 11:32 pm
Location: Queensland, Australia

Re: Nibbana

Postby retrofuturist » Thu Feb 05, 2009 8:07 am

Greetings Chris,

In complete seriousness, there is no connection.

In not so seriousness, it's based on the two meanings of the word retort ...

re·tort 1 (r-tôrt)
v. re·tort·ed, re·tort·ing, re·torts
v.tr.
1.
a. To reply, especially to answer in a quick, caustic, or witty manner. See Synonyms at answer.
b. To present a counterargument to.
2. To return in kind; pay back.
v.intr.
1. To make a reply, especially a quick, caustic, or witty one.
2. To present a counterargument.
3. To return like for like; retaliate.
n.
1. A quick incisive reply, especially one that turns the first speaker's words to his or her own disadvantage.
2. The act or an instance of retorting.
[Latin retorqure, retort-, to bend back, retort : re-, re- + torqure, to bend, twist; see terkw- in Indo-European roots.]

re·tort 2 (r-tôrt, rtôrt)
n.
A closed laboratory vessel with an outlet tube, used for distillation, sublimation, or decomposition by heat.

Now, we've seen a couple of retorts (defn.2), but I'm still interested in seeing a Mahavihara retort (defn.1) to Element's insightful comment.

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: 14521
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 9:52 pm
Location: Melbourne, Australia

Re: Nibbana

Postby tiltbillings » Thu Feb 05, 2009 8:22 am

Judging from definition one, and its subsections, we really do not want a retort.
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: 18354
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2008 9:25 am
Location: Turtle Island

Re: Nibbana

Postby retrofuturist » Thu Feb 05, 2009 10:28 am

Greetings,

Further to Element's comment above...

Ud 4.4 -Juñha Sutta
http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka ... .than.html

Whose mind is like rock,
steady,
unmoved,
dispassionate for things that spark passion,
unangered by things that spark anger:
When one's mind is developed like this,
from where can there come
suffering & stress?


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: 14521
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 9:52 pm
Location: Melbourne, Australia

Re: Nibbana

Postby Dhammanando » Thu Feb 05, 2009 11:11 am

Hi Element,

Only clinging is dukkha.


Well, that's a novel claim. But nothing in the rest of your post supports it.

Dukkha-dukkhatā is not dukkha. Dukkha-dukkhatā is dukkha for putujanas:

But when the Blessed One had entered upon the rainy season, there arose in him a severe illness, and sharp and deadly pains came upon him. And the Blessed One endured them mindfully, clearly comprehending and unperturbed. (DN 16)


But the passage you cite doesn't show that "dukkha-dukkhatā is dukkha for puthujjanas." Quite the contrary, since dukkha-dukkhatā is bodily pain, and since the passage describes such pain as arising in an arahant, clearly dukkha-dukkhatā is not confined to puthujjanas. All the passage shows is that one ariyan, the Buddha, was able to endure bodily pain with mindfulness and equanimity. But other ariyans were not thus able and needed encouragement from the Buddha or other bhikkhus.

    Now at that time Mahāpajāpatī Gotamī became ill. Monks who were elders approached Mahāpajāpatī Gotamī, and having approached they spoke thus to Mahāpajāpatī Gotamī:

    “Gotamī, we hope you are bearing up, we hope you are getting better.”

    “Venerable sirs, I am not bearing up, I am not getting better. Please, venerable sirs, teach me the Dhamma.”
    (Vin. iv. 56)

See also the Khemaka Sutta (SN. iii. 126-32), the three Gilāna Suttas (SN. v. 79-81),and the Phagguna Sutta (AN. iii. 379-83).

Saṅkhāra-dukkhatā and dukkha lakana are not dukkha. They are also dukkha for putujanas:

278. "All conditioned things are dukkha" — when one sees this with wisdom, one turns away from suffering. This is the path to purification. (Dhammapada)


But the passage you cite doesn't show that "saṅkhāra-dukkhatā is dukkha for puthujjanas." Quite the contrary, it states that "all conditioned things are dukkha," with no qualification. I would guess you have been misled by the translation "one turns away from suffering," which might be taken as implying that one no longer has any relationship at all to the thing in question. But the Pali won't support such a reading:

    “sabbe saṅkhārā dukkhā” ti, yadā paññāya passati.
    atha nibbindati dukkhe, esa maggo visuddhiyā.

The verb 'nibbindati' (the source of the noun 'nibbidā') means "to turn away" in the sense of becoming disgusted or disillusioned with something. It does not mean that one is at once freed from the thing in question. All saṅkhāras are dukkha in the sense of being oppressed by rise and fall (udayavaya-ppaṭipīḷana) and they continue to be so whether they arise for a puthujjana, a sekha or an asekha. Hence the saying: "Whatsoever is felt, all that is included in dukkha."

Only upadana dukkha is real dukkha.


It may be more vivid or palpable, but that doesn't make it more "real". Moreover, given that it is seeing saṅkhāra-dukkha that liberates, and given that the four noble truths are "profound, hard to see... etc.", we shouldn't expect saṅkhāra-dukkha to be something terribly vivid or palpable.

The Third Noble Truth is about dukkha nirodha. 'Nirodha' here is permanent nirodha (as distinct from atungkama). The Buddha has said this dukkha nirodha is to be 'realised'. To 'realise' something requires a mind. Realisation or experience cannot occur when there are no aggregates. Therefore, the Mahavihara retort is not in accord to the Lord Buddha's teaching itself.


Well, neither of us is likely to persuade the other on this, for our disagreement is rooted in markedly different conceptions of what the problem of dukkha consists in. But for those readers who take saṃsāra seriously, here's how nirodha is understood in the classical Theravāda:

    Nirodha (cessation): the word ni denotes absence, and the word rodha a prison. Now the third truth is empty of all [post-mortem] destinies and so there is no constraint (rodha) of suffering here reckoned as prison of the round of rebirths.

    Or, when that cessation has been arrived at, there is no more constraint of suffering reckoned as the prison of the round of rebirths. And being the opposite of that prison, it is called dukkha-nirodha.

    Or alternatively, it is called 'cessation of suffering' because it is a condition for the cessation of suffering consisting in non-arising.

    [...]

    Also cessation is of one kind, being the unconditioned element.
    But indirectly it is of two kinds, as "with result of past clinging left" and as "without result of past clinging left."
    And of three kinds, as the stilling of the three kinds of becoming.
    And of four kinds, as approachable by the four [ariyan] paths.
    And of five kinds, as the subsiding of the five kinds of delight.
    And of six kinds, classed according to the destruction of the six groups of craving.
    (adapted from Path of Purification XVI 18, 63, 94)


Further, in the Third Noble Truth, the Lord Buddha has advised dukkha nirodha is solely the cessation of craving.


It is the fruit of the abandoning of craving. The abandoning of craving partly yields its effect at the time of the attainment of arahatta-phala, for example, by cutting off a variety of afflictive mental factors for the remainder of the arahant's life. It wholly yields its effect at the time of nibbāna without remainder. To assert otherwise is to ignore the fact that the first truth includes aging, sickness and death, to which an arahant is still subject. The first noble truth doesn't say "Aging, sickness and death are only dukkha if you're a puthujjana."

Best wishes,
Dhammanando Bhikkhu
    ...and this thought arose in the mind of the Blessed One:
    “Who lives without reverence lives miserably.”
    Uruvela Sutta, A.ii.20

    It were endless to dispute upon everything that is disputable.
    — William Penn Some Fruits of Solitude,
User avatar
Dhammanando
 
Posts: 1261
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 10:44 pm
Location: Wat Pa Mieng Khun Pang, Chiang Mai

Re: Nibbana

Postby kowtaaia » Thu Feb 05, 2009 2:52 pm

Yam kinci vedayitam, tam pi dukkhasmim.

Whatever sensations one experiences, all are suffering.
Where thought arises and where it dissolves,
There you should abide, O my son.



http://www.buddhistlounge.com/index.htm
User avatar
kowtaaia
 
Posts: 21
Joined: Thu Jan 01, 2009 6:54 pm

Re: Nibbana

Postby tiltbillings » Thu Feb 05, 2009 5:25 pm

kowtaaia wrote:Yam kinci vedayitam, tam pi dukkhasmim.

Whatever sensations one experiences, all are suffering.


A citation for the text, please.
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: 18354
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2008 9:25 am
Location: Turtle Island

Re: Nibbana

Postby tiltbillings » Thu Feb 05, 2009 8:17 pm

kowtaaia,

And back to your earlier statement:

Your request for citation, doesn't make sense. Hopefully, a Theravadin forum doesn't exclude common sense.


A Theravadin does not exclude common sense, but it certainly does not include what people imagine the Buddha to have taught, which is why asking to tie a statement to the actual teachings is not an unreasonable thing to do.
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: 18354
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2008 9:25 am
Location: Turtle Island

Re: Nibbana

Postby kowtaaia » Thu Feb 05, 2009 9:57 pm

tiltbillings wrote:
kowtaaia wrote:Yam kinci vedayitam, tam pi dukkhasmim.

Whatever sensations one experiences, all are suffering.


A citation for the text, please.


It was in the Vipassana Newsletter, actually. Scroll down to the third paragraph under 'Vol.11 No.7 July 5, 2001'. It gives a reference.

http://www.vri.dhamma.org/newsletters/e ... 1-07.shtml
Where thought arises and where it dissolves,
There you should abide, O my son.



http://www.buddhistlounge.com/index.htm
User avatar
kowtaaia
 
Posts: 21
Joined: Thu Jan 01, 2009 6:54 pm

Nibbana

Postby kowtaaia » Thu Feb 05, 2009 10:02 pm

tiltbillings wrote:kowtaaia,

And back to your earlier statement:

Your request for citation, doesn't make sense. Hopefully, a Theravadin forum doesn't exclude common sense.


A Theravadin does not exclude common sense, but it certainly does not include what people imagine the Buddha to have taught, which is why asking to tie a statement to the actual teachings is not an unreasonable thing to do.


Repeating a ***** request, does not magically alter the fact that it was a ***** request to begin with.

In response to "It (the unconditioned) is when conditioning comes to an end."

...you asked: "What sort of conditioning...?"

...the response was: "Conditioning, period."

To repeat, your request for citation, doesn't make sense.

[***** moderator edited]
Where thought arises and where it dissolves,
There you should abide, O my son.



http://www.buddhistlounge.com/index.htm
User avatar
kowtaaia
 
Posts: 21
Joined: Thu Jan 01, 2009 6:54 pm

Re: Nibbana

Postby Element » Fri Feb 06, 2009 3:28 am

kowtaaia wrote:Yam kinci vedayitam, tam pi dukkhasmim.

Whatever sensations one experiences, all are suffering.

kowtaaia

I think it is always both useful and truthful to ask oneself: "I am here to teach when I should be learning given I am only a learner?"

Of course, quoting suttas is not actual experience but the experience in the suttas is that of enlightened beings.
Here, ruler of the gods, a bhikkhu has heard that nothing is worth clinging to. When a bhikkhu has heard nothing is worth clinging to, he directly knows everything; having directly known everything, he fully understands everything; having fully understood everything, whatever feeling he feels, whether pleasant or painful or neither-painful-nor-pleasant, he abides contemplating impermanence in those feelings, contemplating fading away, contemplating cessation, contemplating relinquishment. Contemplating thus, he does not cling to anything in the world. When he does not cling, he is not agitated. When he is not agitated, he personally attains Nibbana. He understands: 'What had to be done has been done'. Briefly, it is in this way, ruler of the gods, that a bhikkhu is liberated in the destruction of craving, one who has reached the ultimate end.

Culatanhasankhaya Sutta
Last edited by Element on Sat Feb 07, 2009 1:41 am, edited 1 time in total.
Element
 

Re: Nibbana

Postby Element » Fri Feb 06, 2009 3:31 am

kowtaaia wrote:Yam kinci vedayitam, tam pi dukkhasmim.

Whatever sensations one experiences, all are suffering.


What, bhikkhus, is the Nibbana-element with residue left? Here a bhikkhu is an arahant, one whose taints are destroyed, the holy life fulfilled, who has done what had to be done, laid down the burden, attained the goal, destroyed the fetters of being, completely released through final knowledge. However, his five sense faculties remain unimpaired, by which he still experiences what is agreeable and disagreeable and feels pleasure and pain. It is the extinction of attachment, hate, and delusion in him that is called the Nibbana-element with residue left.

Nibbana element
Last edited by Element on Sat Feb 07, 2009 1:44 am, edited 1 time in total.
Element
 

Re: Nibbana

Postby tiltbillings » Fri Feb 06, 2009 3:32 am

Kowtaaia,

Repeating a ***** request, does not magically alter the fact that it was a ***** request to begin with.

In response to "It (the unconditioned) is when conditioning comes to an end."

...you asked: "What sort of conditioning...?"

...the response was: "Conditioning, period."

To repeat, your request for citation, doesn't make sense

*****? Not really. The Buddha was very specific as to what sort of conditioning he was referring to, and I am simply wondering what you might be meaning by "Conditioning, period," which really does not tell us anything, yet. And I am wondering how what you are claiming of the Buddha’s teaching is actually congruent with the Buddha’s teaching. So, asking for a citation is hardly *****. It is simply part of the give and take of dialogue, which is the purpose of the this forum.
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: 18354
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2008 9:25 am
Location: Turtle Island

Re: Nibbana

Postby Element » Fri Feb 06, 2009 3:49 am

Dhammanando wrote: To assert otherwise is to ignore the fact that the first truth includes aging, sickness and death, to which an arahant is still subject. The first noble truth doesn't say "Aging, sickness and death are only dukkha if you're a puthujjana."

Dhammanando

Understanding language, conventional & ultimate, is essential. Maybe you could possibly kindly post some quotes about language for the forum?

"'He has been stilled where the currents of construing do not flow. And when the currents of construing do not flow, he is said to be a sage at peace.' Thus was it said. With reference to what was it said? 'I am' is a construing. 'I am this' is a construing. 'I shall be' is a construing. 'I shall not be'... 'I shall be possessed of form'... 'I shall not be possessed of form'... 'I shall be percipient'... 'I shall not be percipient'... 'I shall be neither percipient nor non-percipient' is a construing. Construing is a disease, construing is a cancer, construing is an arrow. By going beyond all construing, he is said to be a sage at peace.

"Furthermore, a sage at peace is not born, does not age, does not die, is unagitated, and is free from longing. He has nothing whereby he would be born. Not being born, will he age? Not aging, will he die? Not dying, will he be agitated? Not being agitated, for what will he long? It was in reference to this that it was said, 'He has been stilled where the currents of construing do not flow. And when the currents of construing do not flow, he is said to be a sage at peace.'


Dhatu-vibhanga Sutta
Last edited by Element on Sat Feb 07, 2009 1:46 am, edited 2 times in total.
Element
 

Re: Nibbana

Postby Cittasanto » Fri Feb 06, 2009 9:27 am

I was reading the Sabba sutta yesterday and in the footnotes it had something interesting with regard to this topic so here is all the footnote
1. The Commentary's treatment of this discourse is very peculiar. To begin with, it delineates three other "All's" in addition to the one defined here, one of them supposedly larger in scope than the one defined here: the Allness of the Buddha's omniscience (literally, All-knowingness). This, despite the fact that the discourse says that the description of such an all lies beyond the range of explanation.

Secondly, the Commentary includes nibbana (unbinding) within the scope of the All described here — as a dhamma, or object of the intellect — even though there are many other discourses in the Canon specifically stating that nibbana lies beyond the range of the six senses and their objects. Sn 5.6, for instance, indicates that a person who has attained nibbana has gone beyond all phenomena (sabbe dhamma), and therefore cannot be described. MN 49 discusses a "consciousness without feature" (viññanam anidassanam) that does not partake of the "Allness of the All." Furthermore, the following discourse (SN 35.24) says that the "All" is to be abandoned. At no point does the Canon say that nibbana is to be abandoned. Nibbana follows on cessation (nirodha), which is to be realized. Once nibbana is realized, there are no further tasks to be done.

Thus it seems more this discourse's discussion of "All" is meant to limit the use of the word "all" throughout the Buddha's teachings to the six sense spheres and their objects. As the following discourse shows, this would also include the consciousness, contact, and feelings connected with the sense spheres and their objects. Nibbana would lie outside of the word, "all." This would fit in with another point made several times in the Canon: that dispassion is the highest of all dhammas (Iti 90), while the arahant has gone beyond even dispassion (Sn 4.6; Sn 4.10).

This raises the question, if the word "all" does not include nibbana, does that mean that one may infer from the statement, "all phenomena are not-self" that nibbana is self? The answer is no. As AN 4.174 states, to even ask if there is anything remaining or not remaining (or both, or neither) after the cessation of the six sense spheres is to differentiate what is by nature undifferentiated (or to complicate the uncomplicated — see the Introduction to MN 18). The range of differentiation goes only as far as the "All." Perceptions of self or not-self, which would count as differentiation, would not apply beyond the "All." When the cessation of the "All" is experienced, all differentiation is allayed.
This offering maybe right, or wrong, but it is one, the other, both, or neither!
With Metta
Upāsaka Cittasanto
Blog, - Some Suttas Translated, Ajahn Chah.
"Others will misconstrue reality due to their personal perspectives, doggedly holding onto and not easily discarding them; We shall not misconstrue reality due to our own personal perspectives, nor doggedly holding onto them, but will discard them easily. This effacement shall be done."
User avatar
Cittasanto
 
Posts: 5660
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 10:31 pm
Location: Ellan Vannin

Re: Nibbana

Postby Element » Fri Feb 06, 2009 12:40 pm

Dhammanando wrote:Well, that's a novel claim. But nothing in the rest of your post supports it.

Dhammanando

I trust MN 37 & 38 support it and many more suttas:
On seeing a form with the eye, he is not passionate for it if it is pleasing; he is not angry at it if it is displeasing. He lives with attention to body established, with an immeasurable mind and he understands realistically the deliverance of mind and deliverance by wisdom wherein those evil unwholesome states cease without remainder. Having abandoned favouring and opposing, whatever feeling he feels - whether pleasant or painful or neither-pleasant-nor-painful - he does not delight in that feeling, welcome it, or remain holding to it. As he does not do so, delight in feelings ceases in him. From the cessation of his delight comes cessation of clinging; from the cessation of clinging, the cessation of becoming; from the cessation of becoming, the cessation of birth; from the cessation of birth, ageing-&-death, sorrow, lamentation, pain, grief and despair cease. Thus is the cessation of this entire mass of suffering.

Mahàtanhàsankhaya Sutta


Dhammanando wrote:But the passage you cite doesn't show that "dukkha-dukkhatā is dukkha for puthujjanas."

Dhammanando

My post is merely word play, a play with words.

Are you saying the Lord Buddha was not free from dukkha even though his mind experienced dukkha vedana (painful feelings)?

Are you saying the Buddha did not quench the entire mass of suffering?

Are you saying the world requires a Sammasambuddha to advise it dukkha vedana is dukkha?

Dhammanando wrote:
    Now at that time Mahāpajāpatī Gotamī became ill. Monks who were elders approached Mahāpajāpatī Gotamī, and having approached they spoke thus to Mahāpajāpatī Gotamī:

    “Gotamī, we hope you are bearing up, we hope you are getting better.”

    “Venerable sirs, I am not bearing up, I am not getting better. Please, venerable sirs, teach me the Dhamma.”
    (Vin. iv. 56)

For me, the above quote is irrelevent. Indeed, Mahāpajāpatī Gotamī was getting sicker and sicker, more pained and more pained. However, I trust her mind was liberated from psychological dukkha.

Dhammanando wrote:But the passage you cite doesn't show that "saṅkhāra-dukkhatā is dukkha for puthujjanas." Quite the contrary, it states that "all conditioned things are dukkha," with no qualification. I would guess you have been misled by the translation "one turns away from suffering," which might be taken as implying that one no longer has any relationship at all to the thing in question.

All things are indeed dukkha. A motor car is an example. For one with wisdom, a motor car is dukkha because it is impermanent and subject to breaking down and decay. This dukkha is the car is unsatisfactory, it is imperfect. It cannot be relied on. These qualities are dukkha.

Thus the more a wise person realises the dukkha of a motor car, the more their mind is liberated from suffering. The motor car is dukkha but the mind of the wise being is not dukkha.

However, for a putajana, the dukkha motor car is dukkha. The putujana becomes aggreived when the car falls apart and spends their time craving for a better car that will never fall apart.

For the putujana, the characteristic of dukkha manifests as dukkha. Whereas for the wise person, the characteristic of dukkha manifests as freedom from dukkha.

Dhammanando wrote:The verb 'nibbindati' (the source of the noun 'nibbidā') means "to turn away" in the sense of becoming disgusted or disillusioned with something.

Yes. When dukkha is fully comprehended the mind becomes free from dukkha due to 'nibbindati'.

Dhammanando wrote:All saṅkhāras are dukkha in the sense of being oppressed by rise and fall (udayavaya-ppaṭipīḷana) and they continue to be so whether they arise for a puthujjana, a sekha or an asekha.

A rock or block of cement is a saṅkhāras. It is subject to dukkha but does not experience dukkha because a block of cement has no mind. Thus a block of cement does not experience "oppression". Only a mind can experience oppression.

Dhammanando wrote:Hence the saying: "Whatsoever is felt, all that is included in dukkha."

Clearly, the many suttas contradict this, as I have quoted. Whatever the intention if these words, the translation appears misinterpreted. The Lord Buddha felt experiences but was free from all dukkha.

Dhammanando wrote:Only upadana dukkha is real dukkha.

Indeed. Only upadana is real dukkha. Buddha said this in the First Noble Truth, when he said: "In brief, attachment to the five aggregates is dukkha".

The words "in brief" or "in essence" means the subject is addressed in its fullness and completion in merely a few words.

Dhammanando wrote:But for those readers who take saṃsāra seriously, here's how nirodha is understood in the classical Theravāda:

This is a Modern Theravada forum.

Dhammanando wrote:[list]Nirodha (cessation): the word ni denotes absence, and the word rodha a prison. Now the third truth is empty of all [post-mortem] destinies and so there is no constraint (rodha) of suffering here reckoned as prison of the round of rebirths.

The word Nirodha means the quenching or extinguishing of the fires of greed, hatred and delusion. Buddha has explained nirodha in the Third Noble Truth and elsewhere. It is the cessation of craving.

Dhammanando wrote:To assert otherwise is to ignore the fact that the first truth includes aging, sickness and death, to which an arahant is still subject. The first noble truth doesn't say "Aging, sickness and death are only dukkha if you're a puthujjana.

A Sammasambuddha is not required to reveal to the world that birth, old age, disease, death, pain, grief, separation, etc, are dukkha. Most ordinary people understand these things. The First Noble Truth is a gradual teaching. The Buddha listed conventional or putujana dukkha then the dukkha of ultimate truth. In ultimate truth, only attachment is dukkha. Birth, old age, disease, death, pain & separation are what ordinary people mistaken for dukkha.

Best wishes,
Element
Element
 

PreviousNext

Return to Discovering Theravāda

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: MSNbot Media and 3 guests