It is useless to engage in a discussion going no where. If you believe Buddha, any discussion about views is going no where. Objective truth? Ha! There's only one's personal interpretation of a text here, and how to apply it there. Will there be any measure of regularity of this following upon that? Nope. Not objectively. Purely personal. The illusion of objectivity has become a pernicious disease in Buddhist discourse. What is liberation anyway? It's not a something or a nothing as Wittgenstein said of feelings. You could really clean up Buddhism and do the world a great favor if we just talk about what the Pali words were supposed to mean and whether there's a Maghadi correlate that could clear it up. Then people can stop bitching each other out about what reality really is, like anyone will ever really know. Don't let skeptics bog you down with burdens of proof. Liberation is a know it when you see it affair.Kenshou wrote:What?
Vipassanā: What Is Dissolution, Really?
Re: Vipassanā: What Is Dissolution, Really?
- tiltbillings
- Posts: 23046
- Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2008 9:25 am
Re: Vipassanā: What Is Dissolution, Really?
A nechtiker tog!sublime wrote:I'm verklempt. It was not my intention to upset. I could just flog myself, mea culpa mea mulpa mea culpa. Experience. What are we talking about? Mind. It's nothing. It's no body's fault. Honestly, sheesh. We should have a pot luck.
>> 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
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
Re: Vipassanā: What Is Dissolution, Really?
You're welcome.tiltbillings wrote:Thank you for the clarification.
My concerns pertain to view, specifically (i) privileging the writings of Buddhaghosa, et al, over all earlier Pāli sources to such an extent that the latter can only be understood through the former; and (ii) placing so much emphasis on "attaining" an event called a "path moment" without sufficiently locating this experience within the larger soteriological context.tiltbillings wrote:I find your position(s) in regard to Burmerse vipassana are a bit confusing
Re: Vipassanā: What Is Dissolution, Really?
If you could choose only one of any teachers, who would you recommend to study/practice under?Ñāṇa wrote: My concerns pertain to view, specifically (i) privileging the writings of Buddhaghosa, et al, over all earlier Pāli sources to such an extent that the latter can only be understood through the former; and (ii) placing so much emphasis on "attaining" an event called a "path moment" without sufficiently locating this experience within the larger soteriological context.
Re: Vipassanā: What Is Dissolution, Really?
Do you believe the mind is completely independent of thermodynamics?Ñāṇa wrote:What do the laws of thermodynamics have to do with the mind?danieLion wrote:Re: (i) & (ii). Compare to the four laws of thermodynamics, particularly laws 1 & 3 (a.k.a. entropy) (the "first" law is The Zeroth).
D
Re: Vipassanā: What Is Dissolution, Really?
The mind is a system (a process not a thing) and systems are the subject matter of thermodynamics.Ñāṇa wrote:What do the laws of thermodynamics have to do with the mind?danieLion wrote:Re: (i) & (ii). Compare to the four laws of thermodynamics, particularly laws 1 & 3 (a.k.a. entropy) (the "first" law is The Zeroth).
D
Re: Vipassanā: What Is Dissolution, Really?
There are many decent and well-intentioned teachers. I don't know of any one who would stand out as better or more learned or more accomplished than all others.Clarence wrote:If you could choose only one of any teachers, who would you recommend to study/practice under?
Re: Vipassanā: What Is Dissolution, Really?
AFAIK thermodynamics pertains exclusively to physical systems, does it not?danieLion wrote:The mind is a system (a process not a thing) and systems are the subject matter of thermodynamics.
I believe that the laws of thermodynamics have little if any relevance with regard to the four noble truths, the noble eightfold path, and liberation.danieLion wrote:Do you believe the mind is completely independent of thermodynamics?
-
- Posts: 354
- Joined: Fri Nov 06, 2009 5:48 am
Re: Vipassanā: What Is Dissolution, Really?
You seem to equate the view of momentary rising and falling of dhammas with the belief in the existence of an independent entity. It doesn't have to be and it is certainly not, especially so because momentary rising and falling of dhammas is perceived as a result of perceiving dependent origination.Ñāṇa wrote:The idea of a determinate reality comprised of discrete momentary dhammas is a product of too much unchecked ideation.dhamma follower wrote:I don't buy into this classification of realism...I think it is a product of too much philosophies.
The alteration of what persists (ṭhitassa aññathatta) doesn't entail a theory of discrete momentary dhammas. Neither does DO.dhamma follower wrote:In a world when everything depends upon each other, one element changes implies change on all the others. That's why I said DO implies in it momentariness.
It means that the alteration of what persists can be discerned (ṭhitassa aññathatta paññāyati). SN 22.37 Ānanda Sutta:dhamma follower wrote:When you say consciousness undergoes change and alteration, what does that mean exactly?
- With consciousness an arising is discerned, a falling away is discerned, and an alteration of what persists is discerned.
How small are these "very small parts of the motion"?dhamma follower wrote:When you walk, your step might cover a distance of 30 cm, but 30 cm is made up from very small parts of the motion.
How minute are these "minute moments of conditioning"?dhamma follower wrote:Similarly when consciousness is seemingly attentive to one object for a certain time, it is made up from minute moments of conditioning.
This discussion gets stuck because we don't seem to talk from the same perspective...
Regards,
-
- Posts: 354
- Joined: Fri Nov 06, 2009 5:48 am
Re: Vipassanā: What Is Dissolution, Really?
Who says there is a real entity?Ñāṇa wrote:If a mind moment can't be objectively established, yet one still insists that there is indeed such a real entity then they are subscribing to a worldview that is based on the notion of truth as constituted by a correspondence between our concepts and statements, on the one hand, and the features of an independent, determinate reality, on the other hand.tiltbillings wrote:For all of that, dhamma-follower still does not by necessity of any argument you have put forth need to buy that label of realism,
[/list]
There is nothing esoteric, mysterious, hidden about impermanence, indeed. Yet there are different levels of understanding it: from listening or reading, from reflection and from direct experience. The direct experience of it can happen when we walk, sit, feel, think, listen if sati-sampajana is cultivated sufficiently.... I don't see how the explanation of momentariness makes it muddy, as on the contrary it makes it clearer to understand what is direct insight.There is nothing esoteric, mysterious, or hidden about impermanence. Later accretions like the theory of momentariness only muddy the waters.
All of this, is of course a domain of personal understanding and is subject to change when our understanding changes. Even the reading of the same sutta is not the same for everyone. Some Venerable say this, others say the opposite, all seem to know so well what they talk about...So, again let the Kalama sutta be our guiding principle...
Regards,
Re: Vipassanā: What Is Dissolution, Really?
Do you think that discrete momentary dhammas are rising and falling whether we are aware of this or not?dhamma follower wrote:You seem to equate the view of momentary rising and falling of dhammas with the belief in the existence of an independent entity.
It seems that you do. Real entities = paramattha dhammas subject to momentary origination (uppāda), subsistence (ṭhiti), and dissolution (bhaṅga), which are objectively established as real (bhāvasiddha). That is, they are not merely nominally designated based on selective recognition (saññā).dhamma follower wrote:Who says there is a real entity?
I prefer to rely on the entire Suttapiṭaka.dhamma follower wrote:So, again let the Kalama sutta be our guiding principle...
Re: Vipassanā: What Is Dissolution, Really?
danieLion wrote:The mind is a system (a process not a thing) and systems are the subject matter of thermodynamics.
That depends on whether or not you consider processes like pressure, volume, temperature, energy, the transfer of heat, radiation, etc..., as strictly physical.Ñāṇa wrote:AFAIK thermodynamics pertains exclusively to physical systems, does it not?
It also depends on being able to dismiss all these things as having no sufficient correspondences in the Canon. If I were to investigate, I'd start with the dhatus.
danieLion wrote:Do you believe the mind is completely independent of thermodynamics?
Ñāṇa wrote:I believe that the laws of thermodynamics have little if any relevance with regard to the four noble truths, the noble eightfold path, and liberation.
If the mind is not completely independent of thermodynamic laws, then they have relevance to The Path of Liberation to the extent of the dependency between thermodynamics and The Path.
DanieLion
-
- Posts: 354
- Joined: Fri Nov 06, 2009 5:48 am
Re: Vipassanā: What Is Dissolution, Really?
It depends on what you call "being aware". If it means vinnana, or citta, then no. Dhammas are known only through the co-arising with citta.Ñāṇa wrote:Do you think that discrete momentary dhammas are rising and falling whether we are aware of this or not?dhamma follower wrote:You seem to equate the view of momentary rising and falling of dhammas with the belief in the existence of an independent entity.
It seems that you do. Real entities = paramattha dhammas subject to momentary origination (uppāda), subsistence (ṭhiti), and dissolution (bhaṅga), which are objectively established as real (bhāvasiddha). That is, they are not merely nominally designated based on selective recognition (saññā).dhamma follower wrote:Who says there is a real entity?
If it means sati-sampajana, then yes. The fact that our observation of reality gets deeper and more and more in details as our sati-sampajana grows suggests that it happens all the time like that, only our faculty to actually have clear seeing and comprehension about is not the same for everyone and at all time.
The problem lies in trying to make a model of reality outside the scope of our observation- it is a kind of grasping. As long as it is understood for what it is, i.e. experiential stages to the extent of removing wrong view about self and permanence and of reducing attachment, the goal is fulfilled. When one goes beyond this implication to attempt to make a model of reality from what it is totally experiential, it becomes unnecessary philosophy- an approach that the Buddha always warned people to avoid.
I suppose that you know I was saying that in the context of your citing of many books, essays etc... Even if it comes from a monk, a respectable teacher, or sounds very convincing, we don't have to believe it without considering carefully...I prefer to rely on the entire Suttapiṭaka.dhamma follower wrote:So, again let the Kalama sutta be our guiding principle...
Regards,
Re: Vipassanā: What Is Dissolution, Really?
And what makes you believe that it ever happens like that?dhamma follower wrote:The fact that our observation of reality gets deeper and more and more in details as our sati-sampajana grows suggests that it happens all the time like that....
There's no reason to believe in discrete momentary dhammas.dhamma follower wrote:Even if it comes from a monk, a respectable teacher, or sounds very convincing, we don't have to believe it without considering carefully...
Re: Vipassanā: What Is Dissolution, Really?
I'm not dismissing the laws of thermodynamics as a source of worldly knowledge. I'm suggesting that one doesn't need to know anything about the laws of thermodynamics to practice the path and attain liberation.danieLion wrote:It also depends on being able to dismiss all these things as having no sufficient correspondences in the Canon.