Is everything Suffering?

Exploring Theravāda's connections to other paths - what can we learn from other traditions, religions and philosophies?
Post Reply
User avatar
kirk5a
Posts: 1959
Joined: Thu Sep 23, 2010 1:51 pm

Is everything Suffering?

Post by kirk5a »

rowyourboat wrote: having the Right View that 1) everything IS suffering
Where did the Buddha say "everything is suffering"? And where did he say Right View is "everything is suffering"?
"When one thing is practiced & pursued, ignorance is abandoned, clear knowing arises, the conceit 'I am' is abandoned, latent tendencies are uprooted, fetters are abandoned. Which one thing? Mindfulness immersed in the body." -AN 1.230
User avatar
Alex123
Posts: 4035
Joined: Wed Mar 10, 2010 11:32 pm

Re: Gunaratana's Teaching Method in "Mindfulness"

Post by Alex123 »

kirk5a wrote:
rowyourboat wrote: having the Right View that 1) everything IS suffering
Where did the Buddha say "everything is suffering"? And where did he say Right View is "everything is suffering"?


Whether it be pleasant or painful, Along with the neither-painful-nor-pleasant, Both the internal and the external, Whatever kind of feeling there is: Having known, This is suffering (dukkhanti), Perishable, disintegrating, Having touched and touched them, seeing their fall, Thus one loses one's passion for them” SN36.2(2)

"Pleasant feeling, bhikkhus, should be seen as painful;"
Sukhā, bhikkhave, vedanā dukkhato daṭṭhabbā -SN 36.5(5)


" Whatever is felt is included in suffering." yaṃ kiñci vedayitaṃ taṃ dukkhasmi’nti - SN 36.11(1)

All formations are stressful. Sabbe saṅkhārā dukkhā’’ti , Dhp 278

'Pleasant' with regard to the stressful is a perversion of perception, a perversion of mind, a perversion of view. 'Stressful' with regard to the stressful is a non-perversion of perception, a non-perversion of mind, a non-perversion of view.
http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka ... .than.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
User avatar
kirk5a
Posts: 1959
Joined: Thu Sep 23, 2010 1:51 pm

Re: Gunaratana's Teaching Method in "Mindfulness"

Post by kirk5a »

Alex123 wrote: “Whether it be pleasant or painful, Along with the neither-painful-nor-pleasant, Both the internal and the external, Whatever kind of feeling there is: Having known, This is suffering (dukkhanti), Perishable, disintegrating, Having touched and touched them, seeing their fall, Thus one loses one's passion for them” SN36.2(2)

"Pleasant feeling, bhikkhus, should be seen as painful;"
Sukhā, bhikkhave, vedanā dukkhato daṭṭhabbā -SN 36.5(5)


" Whatever is felt is included in suffering." yaṃ kiñci vedayitaṃ taṃ dukkhasmi’nti - SN 36.11(1)

All formations are stressful. Sabbe saṅkhārā dukkhā’’ti [/i], Dhp 278

'Pleasant' with regard to the stressful is a perversion of perception, a perversion of mind, a perversion of view. 'Stressful' with regard to the stressful is a non-perversion of perception, a non-perversion of mind, a non-perversion of view.
http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka ... .than.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
I do not see "everything is suffering" there.
"When one thing is practiced & pursued, ignorance is abandoned, clear knowing arises, the conceit 'I am' is abandoned, latent tendencies are uprooted, fetters are abandoned. Which one thing? Mindfulness immersed in the body." -AN 1.230
User avatar
mikenz66
Posts: 19943
Joined: Sat Jan 10, 2009 7:37 am
Location: Aotearoa, New Zealand

Re: Gunaratana's Teaching Method in "Mindfulness"

Post by mikenz66 »

kirk5a wrote: I do not see "everything is suffering" there.
Perhaps that statement is just slightly extreme. :tongue:
Would you prefer "all conditioned things are dukkha"?

:anjali:
Mike
User avatar
reflection
Posts: 1116
Joined: Wed Mar 30, 2011 9:27 pm

Re: Is everything Suffering?

Post by reflection »

Nibbana is not suffering. So not :quote: everything :quote: is suffering. :juggling:
User avatar
kirk5a
Posts: 1959
Joined: Thu Sep 23, 2010 1:51 pm

Re: Is everything Suffering?

Post by kirk5a »

mikenz66 wrote: Perhaps that statement is just slightly extreme. :tongue:
Would you prefer "all conditioned things are dukkha"?
Thanks for making a new topic. It's not a matter of preference. "All conditioned things are dukkha" is something he actually said.
277. "All conditioned things are impermanent" — when one sees this with wisdom, one turns away from suffering. This is the path to purification.

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

279. "All things are not-self" — when one sees this with wisdom, one turns away from suffering. This is the path to purification.
http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka ... .budd.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Now if "everything is suffering" were true then the following could not also be true:

The unfashioned, the end,
the effluent-less, the true, the beyond,
the subtle, the very-hard-to-see,
the ageless, permanence, the undecaying,
the featureless, non-elaboration,
peace, the deathless,
the exquisite, bliss, solace,
the exhaustion of craving,
the wonderful, the marvelous,
the secure, security,
unbinding,
the unafflicted, the passionless, the pure,
release, non-attachment,
the island, shelter, harbor, refuge,
the ultimate.
— SN 43.1-44
http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/auth ... andha.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

So how could "everything is suffering" be right view?
"When one thing is practiced & pursued, ignorance is abandoned, clear knowing arises, the conceit 'I am' is abandoned, latent tendencies are uprooted, fetters are abandoned. Which one thing? Mindfulness immersed in the body." -AN 1.230
User avatar
Prasadachitta
Posts: 974
Joined: Sat Jan 10, 2009 6:52 am
Location: San Francisco (The Mission) Ca USA
Contact:

Re: Is everything Suffering?

Post by Prasadachitta »

"Monks, I will teach you the All. Listen & pay close attention. I will speak."

"As you say, lord," the monks responded.

The Blessed One said, "What is the All? Simply the eye & forms, ear & sounds, nose & aromas, tongue & flavors, body & tactile sensations, intellect & ideas. This, monks, is called the All. [1] Anyone who would say, 'Repudiating this All, I will describe another,' if questioned on what exactly might be the grounds for his statement, would be unable to explain, and furthermore, would be put to grief. Why? Because it lies beyond range."
SN 35.23

Not that I can say anything valuable about this but it seems appropriate to consider. Also look into what my signature says.
"Beautifully taught is the Lord's Dhamma, immediately apparent, timeless, of the nature of a personal invitation, progressive, to be attained by the wise, each for himself." Anguttara Nikaya V.332
User avatar
Alex123
Posts: 4035
Joined: Wed Mar 10, 2010 11:32 pm

Re: Is everything Suffering?

Post by Alex123 »

kirk5a wrote: So how could "everything is suffering" be right view?
Nibbāna is not everything.

All formations are stressful. Sabbe saṅkhārā dukkhā’’ti, Dhp 278

“Bhikkhus, the arising, continuation, production, [32] and manifestation of form is the arising of suffering, the continuation of disease, the manifestation of aging-and-death. The arising of feeling … of perception … of volitional constructions …of consciousness is the arising of suffering, the continuation of disease, the manifestation of aging-and-death. “The cessation, subsiding, and passing away of form … of consciousness is the cessation of suffering, the subsiding of disease, the passing away of aging-and-death.” - SN22.30 (9) Arising BB Trans

And what, bhikkhus, is misery? Form is misery; feeling is misery; perception is misery; volitional constructions are misery; consciousness is misery. This is called misery." - SN22.31 (10) The Root of Misery BB Trans.
User avatar
ground
Posts: 2591
Joined: Wed Nov 25, 2009 6:01 am

Re: Is everything Suffering?

Post by ground »

In short, the five clinging-aggregates are stress.
http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka ... tml#part-6" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
So everything in the context of the five clinging-aggregates is dukkha. I am assuming that if the aggregates lose their quality of "clinging" then they actually cease. So therefore I guess it is appropriate to say that "everything is dukkha" because with the cessation of the aggregates, "everything" ceases and dukkha ceases.


Kind regards
User avatar
Prasadachitta
Posts: 974
Joined: Sat Jan 10, 2009 6:52 am
Location: San Francisco (The Mission) Ca USA
Contact:

Re: Is everything Suffering?

Post by Prasadachitta »

Aren't the aggregates always ceasing.
"Beautifully taught is the Lord's Dhamma, immediately apparent, timeless, of the nature of a personal invitation, progressive, to be attained by the wise, each for himself." Anguttara Nikaya V.332
User avatar
kirk5a
Posts: 1959
Joined: Thu Sep 23, 2010 1:51 pm

Re: Is everything Suffering?

Post by kirk5a »

Alex123 wrote:
kirk5a wrote: So how could "everything is suffering" be right view?
Nibbāna is not everything.

All formations are stressful. Sabbe saṅkhārā dukkhā’’ti, Dhp 278
Right. And again, that does not say "all things are stressful."

"All formations are stressful" is not the same as "All things are stressful." Which is why Dhp 278 says "all conditioned things (formations)" and Dhp 279 says "all things."
"When one thing is practiced & pursued, ignorance is abandoned, clear knowing arises, the conceit 'I am' is abandoned, latent tendencies are uprooted, fetters are abandoned. Which one thing? Mindfulness immersed in the body." -AN 1.230
User avatar
Prasadachitta
Posts: 974
Joined: Sat Jan 10, 2009 6:52 am
Location: San Francisco (The Mission) Ca USA
Contact:

Re: Is everything Suffering?

Post by Prasadachitta »

What is a thing?


Im not sure "things" being Dukkha should much of a surprise.
"Beautifully taught is the Lord's Dhamma, immediately apparent, timeless, of the nature of a personal invitation, progressive, to be attained by the wise, each for himself." Anguttara Nikaya V.332
User avatar
ground
Posts: 2591
Joined: Wed Nov 25, 2009 6:01 am

Re: Is everything Suffering?

Post by ground »

Prasadachitta wrote:Aren't the aggregates always ceasing.
An aggregate as a particular event arises and ceases, yes. But once a particular has ceased the next one arises. In this sense one speaks about "the aggregates" referring to the continuum of particulars that arise and cease each on its own. In the same sense "the aggregates" have not ceased although each particular belonging to the class "the aggregates" ceases if there is still an arising (and ceasing) of particulars.
"the cessation of the aggregates" means that no particular will arise again, the continuum is ended.


Kind regards
User avatar
kirk5a
Posts: 1959
Joined: Thu Sep 23, 2010 1:51 pm

Re: Is everything Suffering?

Post by kirk5a »

Prasadachitta wrote:What is a thing?


Im not sure "things" being Dukkha should much of a surprise.
"thing" is an English word. The word in Pali is "dhamma." And he did not say all dhammas are dukkha. He did not say all things are dukkha. Not that I see.
dhamma [Skt. dharma]:
(1) Event; a phenomenon in and of itself; (2) mental quality; (3) doctrine, teaching; (4) nibbāna.
http://www.accesstoinsight.org/glossary.html#d" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

For comparison:
thing
O.E. þing "meeting, assembly," later "entity, being, matter" (subject of deliberation in an assembly), also "act, deed, event, material object, body, being," from P.Gmc. *thengan "appointed time" (cf. O.Fris. thing "assembly, council, suit, matter, thing," M.Du. dinc "court-day, suit, plea, concern, affair, thing," Du. ding "thing," O.H.G. ding "public assembly for judgment and business, lawsuit," Ger. ding "affair, matter, thing," O.N. þing "public assembly"). Some suggest an ultimate connection to PIE root *ten- "stretch," perhaps on notion of "stretch of time for a meeting or assembly." For sense evolution, cf. Fr. chose, Sp. cosa "thing," from L. causa "judicial process, lawsuit, case;" L. res "affair, thing," also "case at law, cause." Old sense is preserved in second element of hustings and in Icelandic Althing, the nation's general assembly. Used colloquially since c.1600 to indicate things the speaker can't name at the moment, often with various meaningless suffixes, e.g. thingumbob (1751), thingamajig (1824). Southern U.S. pronunciation thang attested from 1937. The thing "what's stylish or fashionable" is recorded from 1762. Phrase do your thing "follow your particular predilection," though associated with hippie-speak of 1960s is attested from 1841.
http://www.etymonline.com/index.php?search=thing" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
"When one thing is practiced & pursued, ignorance is abandoned, clear knowing arises, the conceit 'I am' is abandoned, latent tendencies are uprooted, fetters are abandoned. Which one thing? Mindfulness immersed in the body." -AN 1.230
User avatar
Prasadachitta
Posts: 974
Joined: Sat Jan 10, 2009 6:52 am
Location: San Francisco (The Mission) Ca USA
Contact:

Re: Is everything Suffering?

Post by Prasadachitta »

TMingyur wrote:
Prasadachitta wrote:Aren't the aggregates always ceasing.
An aggregate as a particular event arises and ceases, yes. But once a particular has ceased the next one arises. In this sense one speaks about "the aggregates" referring to the continuum of particulars that arise and cease each on its own. In the same sense "the aggregates" have not ceased although each particular belonging to the class "the aggregates" ceases if there is still an arising (and ceasing) of particulars.
"the cessation of the aggregates" means that no particular will arise again, the continuum is ended.


Kind regards
He discerns that 'Whatever disturbances that would exist based on the effluent of sensuality... the effluent of becoming... the effluent of ignorance, are not present. And there is only this modicum of disturbance: that connected with the six sensory spheres, dependent on this very body with life as its condition.' He discerns that 'This mode of perception is empty of the effluent of sensuality... becoming... ignorance. And there is just this non-emptiness: that connected with the six sensory spheres, dependent on this very body with life as its condition.' Thus he regards it as empty of whatever is not there. Whatever remains, he discerns as present: 'There is this.' And so this, his entry into emptiness, accords with actuality, is undistorted in meaning, pure — superior & unsurpassed.
MN 121
"Beautifully taught is the Lord's Dhamma, immediately apparent, timeless, of the nature of a personal invitation, progressive, to be attained by the wise, each for himself." Anguttara Nikaya V.332
Post Reply