Hello everyone,
I was wondering if anyone knew of a sutta which discusses the five niyama dhammas. I looked in accesstoinsight but couldn't find anything.
Thank you...
Niyama Dhamma
Niyama Dhamma
With Metta,
Nadi
Nadi
- retrofuturist
- Posts: 27848
- Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 9:52 pm
- Location: Melbourne, Australia
- Contact:
Re: Niyama Dhamma
Greetings Nadi,
There is nothing in the suttas about them. They make their first appearance in the commentarial literature I believe... not sure about their status re: Abhidhamma Pitaka.
Metta,
Retro.
There is nothing in the suttas about them. They make their first appearance in the commentarial literature I believe... not sure about their status re: Abhidhamma Pitaka.
Metta,
Retro.
"Whatever is true, whatever is noble, whatever is right, whatever is pure, whatever is lovely, whatever is admirable—if anything is excellent or praiseworthy—think about such things."
Re: Niyama Dhamma
According to this Wikipedia article http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Karma_in_B ... categories" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false; it's a Commentarial classification.
Mike
Mike
Re: Niyama Dhamma
Thanks Retro and Mike... So, is there no formal teaching that discusses these in detail?
With Metta,
Nadi
Nadi
Re: Niyama Dhamma
If by "formal teaching" you mean "Suttas", then no. I'm sure there is plenty of discussion in the Commentaries, though
http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/auth ... l.html#ch6" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/auth ... l.html#ch6" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
MikeAccording to Buddhism, there are five orders or processes (Niyamas) which operate in the physical and mental realms:
1. Kamma Niyama, order of act and result, e.g., desirable and undesirable acts produce corresponding good and bad results.
2. Utu Niyama, physical (inorganic) order, e.g., seasonal phenomena of winds and rains.
3. Bija Niyama, order of germs or seeds (physical organic order); e.g., rice produced from rice-seed, sugary taste from sugar cane or honey etc. The scientific theory of cells and genes and the physical similarity of twins may be ascribed to this order.
4. Citta Niyama, order of mind or psychic law, e.g., processes of consciousness (Citta vithi), power of mind etc.
5. Dhamma Niyama, order of the norm, e.g., the natural phenomena occurring at the advent of a Bodhisatta in his last birth, gravitation, etc.
Every mental or physical phenomenon could be explained by these all-embracing five orders or processes which are laws in themselves.
Kamma is, therefore, only one of the five orders that prevail in the universe. It is a law in itself, but it does not thereby follow that there should be a law-giver. Ordinary laws of nature, like gravitation, need no law-giver. It operates in its own field without the intervention of an external independent ruling agency.
Nobody, for instance, has decreed that fire should burn. Nobody has commanded that water should seek its own level. No scientist has ordered that water should consist of H2O, and that coldness should be one of its properties. These are their intrinsic characteristics. Kamma is neither fate nor predestination imposed upon us by some mysterious unknown power to which we must helplessly submit ourselves. It is one's own doing reacting on oneself, and so one has the possibility to divert the course of Kamma to some extent. How far one diverts it depends on oneself.
It must also be said that such phraseology as rewards and punishments should not be allowed to enter into discussions concerning the problem of Kamma. For Buddhism does not recognize an Almighty Being who rules His subjects and rewards and punishes them accordingly. Buddhists, on the contrary, believe that sorrow and happiness one experiences are the natural outcome of one's own good and bad actions. It should be stated that Kamma has both the continuative and the retributive principle.
Inherent in Kamma is the potentiality of producing its due effect. The cause produces the effect; the effect explains the cause. Seed produces the fruit; the fruit explains the seed as both are inter-related. Even so Kamma and its effect are inter-related; "the effect already blooms in the cause."
A Buddhist who is fully convinced of the doctrine of Kamma does not pray to another to be saved but confidently relies on himself for his purification because it teaches individual responsibility.
It is this doctrine of Kamma that gives him consolation, hope, self reliance and moral courage. It is this belief in Kamma "that validates his effort, kindles his enthusiasm," makes him ever kind, tolerant and considerate. It is also this firm belief in Kamma that prompts him to refrain from evil, do good and be good without being frightened of any punishment or tempted by any reward.
It is this doctrine of Kamma that can explain the problem of suffering, the mystery of so-called fate or predestination of other religions, and above all the inequality of mankind.
Kamma and rebirth are accepted as axiomatic.
- retrofuturist
- Posts: 27848
- Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 9:52 pm
- Location: Melbourne, Australia
- Contact:
Re: Niyama Dhamma
Greetings Nadi,
THE NIYAMA-DIPANI (The Manual of Cosmic Order)
by Mahathera Ledi Sayadaw
http://www.dhammaweb.net/html/view.php?id=5" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Metta,
Retro.
Not from the Buddha himself, but try this...Nadi wrote:Thanks Retro and Mike... So, is there no formal teaching that discusses these in detail?
THE NIYAMA-DIPANI (The Manual of Cosmic Order)
by Mahathera Ledi Sayadaw
http://www.dhammaweb.net/html/view.php?id=5" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Metta,
Retro.
"Whatever is true, whatever is noble, whatever is right, whatever is pure, whatever is lovely, whatever is admirable—if anything is excellent or praiseworthy—think about such things."
Re: Niyama Dhamma
This is exactly what I was looking for! Thanks Retro.retrofuturist wrote:
THE NIYAMA-DIPANI (The Manual of Cosmic Order)
by Mahathera Ledi Sayadaw
http://www.dhammaweb.net/html/view.php?id=5" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
With Metta,
Nadi
Nadi
Re: Niyama Dhamma
There's also this sutta:
http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka ... .than.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka ... .than.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Re: Niyama Dhamma
I've just uploaded my translation of the relevant texts http://www.jayarava.org/texts/The%20Fiv ... Niyama.pdf
This includes:
Sumaṅgalavilāsinī (2.431),
Atthasālinī (272-274)
Abhidhammāvatāra (CST 66; vs. 468-473; PTS 54), including medieval commentaries on the latter.
Also included are representative texts for the use of the word niyāma in the Nikāyas: Paccaya Sutta (S 12.20), Uppādā Sutta (A 3.134), Āvaraṇa Sutta (A 6.86), Cakkhu Sutta (S 25.1).
Any comments on the translations welcome.
This includes:
Sumaṅgalavilāsinī (2.431),
Atthasālinī (272-274)
Abhidhammāvatāra (CST 66; vs. 468-473; PTS 54), including medieval commentaries on the latter.
Also included are representative texts for the use of the word niyāma in the Nikāyas: Paccaya Sutta (S 12.20), Uppādā Sutta (A 3.134), Āvaraṇa Sutta (A 6.86), Cakkhu Sutta (S 25.1).
Any comments on the translations welcome.
- Cittasanto
- Posts: 6646
- Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 10:31 pm
- Location: Ellan Vannin
- Contact:
Re: Niyama Dhamma
Looks ok I guess
Not read it yet but will have a read through over the weekend, The quick glance at the first few pages I have had, looks quite thorough.
Not read it yet but will have a read through over the weekend, The quick glance at the first few pages I have had, looks quite thorough.
Blog, Suttas, Aj Chah, Facebook.
He who knows only his own side of the case knows little of that. His reasons may be good, and no one may have been able to refute them.
But if he is equally unable to refute the reasons on the opposite side, if he does not so much as know what they are, he has no ground for preferring either opinion …
...
He must be able to hear them from persons who actually believe them … he must know them in their most plausible and persuasive form.
John Stuart Mill
He who knows only his own side of the case knows little of that. His reasons may be good, and no one may have been able to refute them.
But if he is equally unable to refute the reasons on the opposite side, if he does not so much as know what they are, he has no ground for preferring either opinion …
...
He must be able to hear them from persons who actually believe them … he must know them in their most plausible and persuasive form.
John Stuart Mill
Re: Niyama Dhamma
Thank you very much for the tranalstions jayarava. Very useful.
Mike
Mike