Fabrication

A discussion on all aspects of Theravāda Buddhism

Re: Fabrication

Postby Goofaholix » Tue Feb 07, 2012 2:24 am

retrofuturist wrote:I would regard such knowledges as objects of mind-consciousness, at the time they're brought to mind.


Absolutely they are mind-consciousness, however the mind-consciousness sometimes contains information about things that haven't been experienced that could be experienced and mayhave influence ones decision making.

If I were mediatating I would just note "thinking", and distinguish between the process of thought and the story line or content of the thought, this is a very effective way of gaining objectivity over ones thoughts.

So I would call these sankhara, or concepts, or conventions, however i'm not sure if the term sankhara applies to the process of thought or the content of thought or both (obviously the content of thought is not sankhata-dhammaif the content is not based on the all).
"Proper effort is not the effort to make something particular happen. It is the effort to be aware and awake each moment." - Ajahn Chah
"When we see beyond self, we no longer cling to happiness. When we stop clinging, we can begin to be happy." - Ajahn Chah
"Know and watch your heart. It’s pure but emotions come to colour it." — Ajahn Chah
User avatar
Goofaholix
 
Posts: 1915
Joined: Sun Nov 15, 2009 3:49 am
Location: New Zealand

Re: Fabrication

Postby retrofuturist » Tue Feb 07, 2012 2:45 am

Greetings,

Goofaholix wrote:Absolutely they are mind-consciousness, however the mind-consciousness sometimes contains information about things that haven't been experienced that could be experienced and mayhave influence ones decision making.

Yep - concepts, visual and auditory hallucinations, false memories, dreams, synaesthesia, all manner of non-material things may be objects of consciousness.... irrespective of how "real" or otherwise someone deems them to be.

Goofaholix wrote:If I were mediatating I would just note "thinking", and distinguish between the process of thought and the story line or content of the thought, this is a very effective way of gaining objectivity over ones thoughts.

Yes, that works. I quite like this approach from the Satipatthana Sutta (applicable to all media regardless of sensory channel)...

MN 10 wrote:"Furthermore, the monk remains focused on mental qualities in & of themselves with reference to the sixfold internal & external sense media. And how does he remain focused on mental qualities in & of themselves with reference to the sixfold internal & external sense media? There is the case where he discerns the eye, he discerns forms, he discerns the fetter that arises dependent on both. He discerns how there is the arising of an unarisen fetter. And he discerns how there is the abandoning of a fetter once it has arisen. And he discerns how there is no future arising of a fetter that has been abandoned. (The same formula is repeated for the remaining sense media: ear, nose, tongue, body, & intellect.)

(n.b. Thanissaro Bhikkhu translates "dhamma" here as "mental qualities", whereas I would be more inclined to translate it as "phenomena")

Goofaholix wrote:So I would call these sankhara, or concepts, or conventions, however i'm not sure if the term sankhara applies to the process of thought or the content of thought or both.

It applies to both. According to the Khajjaniya Sutta, fabrications are so called because they "fabricate the fabricated".

Goofaholix wrote:obviously the content of thought is not sankhata-dhammaif the content is not based on the all

But what else could it be based on other than sankhata or asankhata dhamma?

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: 14650
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 9:52 pm
Location: Melbourne, Australia

Re: Fabrication

Postby Goofaholix » Tue Feb 07, 2012 3:13 am

retrofuturist wrote:It applies to both. According to the Khajjaniya Sutta, fabrications are so called because they "fabricate the fabricated".

So we're back to the fabrications word again.

retrofuturist wrote:
Goofaholix wrote:obviously the content of thought is not sankhata-dhammaif the content is not based on the all

But what else could it be based on other than sankhata or asankhata dhamma?


Obviously the fact that thought has arisen is part of "the All", but if the content of the thought is not based on the all then then how can it be considered sankhata dhamma by your definition?

For example someone may have a thought about what it must be like to be transgendered based on speculation and imagination and because of this decide it's not for him. If he has never experienced what it is like to be transgendered how can it be considered part of the all?

However skimming back through your posts it appears your definition of "the All" has changed from what has been experienced by the individual sentient being to what can be experienced by sentient beings in general, so perhaps the point is moot.
"Proper effort is not the effort to make something particular happen. It is the effort to be aware and awake each moment." - Ajahn Chah
"When we see beyond self, we no longer cling to happiness. When we stop clinging, we can begin to be happy." - Ajahn Chah
"Know and watch your heart. It’s pure but emotions come to colour it." — Ajahn Chah
User avatar
Goofaholix
 
Posts: 1915
Joined: Sun Nov 15, 2009 3:49 am
Location: New Zealand

Re: Fabrication

Postby retrofuturist » Tue Feb 07, 2012 3:20 am

Greetings Goof,

Goofaholix wrote:For example someone may have a thought about what it must be like to be transgendered based on speculation and imagination and because of this decide it's not for him. If he has never experienced what it is like to be transgendered how can it be considered part of the all?

The thought might involve some mental images in one's mind's eye (which, depending on your definition of 'eye', could be mind-consciousness or eye-consciousness).

The thought might also give rise to the formation of psychosomatic vedana in the region of the skin, in the form of body-consciousness.

It's those fabricated consciousnesses that are actually experienced that fall within the all.

Goofaholix wrote:However skimming back through your posts it appears your definition of "the All" has changed from what has been experienced by the individual sentient being to what can be experienced by sentient beings in general, so perhaps the point is moot.

No, no... it's individual. My all is different to your all.

The above transgender example shows how you might experience certain phenomena within your all, without ever being transgendered.

Either way, I think you've got the idea. I might leave it there, lest I be advised I'm a lost cause, mired in philosophical papanca etc. because I'm not personally satisfied with noting "thinking, thinking", "seeing, seeing" as a method for dealing with sankharas. (I prefer the approach extracted from MN 10, above)

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: 14650
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 9:52 pm
Location: Melbourne, Australia

Re: Fabrication

Postby chownah » Tue Feb 07, 2012 4:27 am

Goofaholix wrote:I'm only talking about what is included in "the All". However objects move in and out of "the All" all the time

I believe you are mistaken. There are no "objects" 'in "the All"'. Thinking in terms of "objects" is the application of a doctrine of self. Phenomena arise and pass away....from this arising and passing away of pheomena we construct (fabricate) constructions (fabrications).
It seems that you are of the view that there is a "real" world "out there" and that when "you" experience "something" that exists "out there" that it moves into "your" "the All" and when "you" are not experiencing a "thing" then it moves out of "your" "the All". It seems to me that the Buddha never talked about anything this way or even hinted that this kind of scenerio was what he was suggesting as a helpful view of things. On the contrary, it seems to me that there is a lot of doctrine of self going on here both as applied to the individual and as applied to objects. I think it is better to develop the perspective that phenomena arise and pass away and from this continuous change we fabricate our experience....I guess....
chownah
chownah
 
Posts: 2639
Joined: Wed Aug 12, 2009 2:19 pm

Re: Fabrication

Postby mikenz66 » Tue Feb 07, 2012 4:32 am

retrofuturist wrote:Either way, I think you've got the idea. I might leave it there, lest I be advised I'm a lost cause, mired in philosophical papanca etc. because I'm not personally satisfied with noting "thinking, thinking", "seeing, seeing" as a method for dealing with sankharas. (I prefer the approach extracted from MN 10, above)

Goofaholix is, of course, practising exactly the advice in the Satipatthana Sutta: developing an understanding of the process of sense impressions, etc. One can't "understand how the arising of the non-arisen fetter comes to be; ..." without first "understanding consciousness and mental objects" (to use a different translator for variety...). Goofaholix is talking about developing a clear focus on conciousness and mental objects (thinking, etc). Once one has that focus, then one can "deal with them" as you put it (as the Buddha says: "understand how the arising of the non-arisen fetter comes to be; ...").

:anjali:
Mike
User avatar
mikenz66
 
Posts: 10229
Joined: Sat Jan 10, 2009 7:37 am
Location: New Zealand

Re: Fabrication

Postby Goofaholix » Tue Feb 07, 2012 4:36 am

mikenz66 wrote:Goofaholix is, of course, practising exactly the advice in the Satipatthana Sutta: developing an understanding of the process of sense impressions, etc. One can't "understand how the arising of the non-arisen fetter comes to be; ..." without first "understanding consciousness and mental objects" (to use a different translator for variety...). Goofaholix is talking about developing a clear focus on conciousness and mental objects (thinking, etc). Once one has that focus, then one can "deal with them" as you put it (as the Buddha says: "understand how the arising of the non-arisen fetter comes to be; ...").


Goofaholix strong in the Force is he.
"Proper effort is not the effort to make something particular happen. It is the effort to be aware and awake each moment." - Ajahn Chah
"When we see beyond self, we no longer cling to happiness. When we stop clinging, we can begin to be happy." - Ajahn Chah
"Know and watch your heart. It’s pure but emotions come to colour it." — Ajahn Chah
User avatar
Goofaholix
 
Posts: 1915
Joined: Sun Nov 15, 2009 3:49 am
Location: New Zealand

Re: Fabrication

Postby chownah » Tue Feb 07, 2012 4:37 am

Goofaholix wrote:I'm only talking about what is included in "the All". However objects move in and out of "the All" all the time

I believe you are mistaken. There are no "objects" 'in "the All"'. Thinking in terms of "objects" is the application of a doctrine of self. Phenomena arise and pass away....from this arising and passing away of pheomena we construct (fabricate) constructions (fabrications).
It seems that you are of the view that there is a "real" world "out there" and that when "you" experience "something" that exists "out there" that it moves into "your" "the All" and when "you" are not experiencing a "thing" then it moves out of "your" "the All". It seems to me that the Buddha never talked about anything this way or even hinted that this kind of scenerio was what he was suggesting as a helpful view of things. On the contrary, it seems to me that there is a lot of doctrine of self going on here both as applied to the individual and as applied to objects. I think it is better to develop the perspective that phenomena arise and pass away and from this continuous change we fabricate our experience....I guess....
You might not agree with me but you have to admit it is in English!!!
chownah
chownah
 
Posts: 2639
Joined: Wed Aug 12, 2009 2:19 pm

Re: Fabrication

Postby Goofaholix » Tue Feb 07, 2012 4:38 am

chownah wrote:It seems that you are of the view that there is a "real" world "out there" and that when "you" experience "something" that exists "out there" that it moves into "your" "the All" and when "you" are not experiencing a "thing" then it moves out of "your" "the All". It seems to me that the Buddha never talked about anything this way or even hinted that this kind of scenerio was what he was suggesting as a helpful view of things. On the contrary, it seems to me that there is a lot of doctrine of self going on here both as applied to the individual and as applied to objects. I think it is better to develop the perspective that phenomena arise and pass away and from this continuous change we fabricate our experience....I guess....
chownah


Yes you're right, phenomena is more correct that objects.
"Proper effort is not the effort to make something particular happen. It is the effort to be aware and awake each moment." - Ajahn Chah
"When we see beyond self, we no longer cling to happiness. When we stop clinging, we can begin to be happy." - Ajahn Chah
"Know and watch your heart. It’s pure but emotions come to colour it." — Ajahn Chah
User avatar
Goofaholix
 
Posts: 1915
Joined: Sun Nov 15, 2009 3:49 am
Location: New Zealand

Re: Fabrication

Postby Goofaholix » Tue Feb 07, 2012 4:41 am

retrofuturist wrote:Either way, I think you've got the idea. I might leave it there, lest I be advised I'm a lost cause, mired in philosophical papanca etc. because I'm not personally satisfied with noting "thinking, thinking", "seeing, seeing" as a method for dealing with sankharas. (I prefer the approach extracted from MN 10, above)


No worries, I note that while I've learned a lot in this exchange I'm not sure I've learned anything that I can use in my day to day practise.
"Proper effort is not the effort to make something particular happen. It is the effort to be aware and awake each moment." - Ajahn Chah
"When we see beyond self, we no longer cling to happiness. When we stop clinging, we can begin to be happy." - Ajahn Chah
"Know and watch your heart. It’s pure but emotions come to colour it." — Ajahn Chah
User avatar
Goofaholix
 
Posts: 1915
Joined: Sun Nov 15, 2009 3:49 am
Location: New Zealand

Re: Fabrication

Postby chownah » Tue Feb 07, 2012 4:52 am

Goofaholix wrote:
chownah wrote:It seems that you are of the view that there is a "real" world "out there" and that when "you" experience "something" that exists "out there" that it moves into "your" "the All" and when "you" are not experiencing a "thing" then it moves out of "your" "the All". It seems to me that the Buddha never talked about anything this way or even hinted that this kind of scenerio was what he was suggesting as a helpful view of things. On the contrary, it seems to me that there is a lot of doctrine of self going on here both as applied to the individual and as applied to objects. I think it is better to develop the perspective that phenomena arise and pass away and from this continuous change we fabricate our experience....I guess....
chownah


Yes you're right, phenomena is more correct that objects.

Yes, phenomena is probaby better but I think an important point is that you seem to have these phenomena moving into and out of "your" "the All". You can call them "phenomena" so as to be politically (or should it be spiritually?) correct but it does seem that you are treating them as objects.....does "object" by any other name stink much less?

Also...I thought a sutta reference might be appropo:
"And why do you call them 'fabrications'? Because they fabricate fabricated things, thus they are called 'fabrications.' What do they fabricate as a fabricated thing? For the sake of form-ness, they fabricate form as a fabricated thing. For the sake of feeling-ness, they fabricate feeling as a fabricated thing. For the sake of perception-hood... For the sake of fabrication-hood... For the sake of consciousness-hood, they fabricate consciousness as a fabricated thing. Because they fabricate fabricated things, they are called fabrications. "
http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka ... .html#fn-3
Notice that consciouness is clearly indicated to be a fabrication....
chownah
chownah
 
Posts: 2639
Joined: Wed Aug 12, 2009 2:19 pm

Re: Fabrication

Postby retrofuturist » Tue Feb 07, 2012 5:10 am

Greetings,

Goofaholix wrote:Goofaholix strong in the Force is he.

Help you he can, yes, hhmmm...

:rofl:

I'm sure Goof knows his practice, and I've enjoyed sharing my thoughts on the subject of sankhara/fabrication with him, to do with as he sees fit. Furthermore, I'm sure he doesn't need defending, and I'm sure he doesn't feel attacked, so the light-sabers can safely be set to one side.

Goofaholix wrote:No worries, I note that while I've learned a lot in this exchange I'm not sure I've learned anything that I can use in my day to day practise.

Goof ~ I was having a look at the Satipatthana Sutta the other day and the word "discern" appeared over 50 times... the clearer you are on what sankharas are, and the extent of the fabrication that is taking place may well contribute to clearer discernment in this regard. As Chownah has pointed out too, it may help avoid a false subject/object dichotomy in relation to how you regard the phenomena that arise, in and outside of formal meditation practice.

Either way, it's an interesting subject, particularly if you're inclined to make reference to paticcasamuppada in your practice (some do, some don't, I do). If you have a meditation teacher you seek advice from, it might be worth asking them about fabrication, to see what implication/application they feel it might have in relation to your meditation practice. I like to believe that the Buddha taught what he did for a reason.

Good luck. :thumbsup:

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: 14650
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 9:52 pm
Location: Melbourne, Australia

Re: Fabrication

Postby mikenz66 » Tue Feb 07, 2012 6:03 am

Hi Retro,

Sorry, I'm lost now. If (almost) everything in sankhara, what is the use of the concept if there is no distinction between phenomena? Take walking, for example. What labels would you use to describe the difference between intention to lift the foot and the motion of the foot?

:anjali:
Mike
User avatar
mikenz66
 
Posts: 10229
Joined: Sat Jan 10, 2009 7:37 am
Location: New Zealand

Re: Fabrication

Postby tiltbillings » Tue Feb 07, 2012 6:38 am

mikenz66 wrote:Hi Retro,

Sorry, I'm lost now. If (almost) everything in sankhara, what is the use of the concept if there is no distinction between phenomena? Take walking, for example. What labels would you use to describe the difference between intention to lift the foot and the motion of the foot?

:anjali:
Mike
Push it a little further and we get shunyata.
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: 19312
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2008 9:25 am

Re: Fabrication

Postby retrofuturist » Tue Feb 07, 2012 7:13 am

Greetings Mike,

mikenz66 wrote:Sorry, I'm lost now. If (almost) everything in sankhara, what is the use of the concept if there is no distinction between phenomena?

The point is that the distinctions themselves are fabrications, not absolutes. The act of making distinctions between phenomena is the act of fabricating. If I were to falsely take these fabricated distinctions as indicative of reality, I would be inferring there was actual substance behind these mental concoctions, whereas the Phena Sutta makes clear there is not.

Phena Sutta wrote:"Now suppose that a man desiring heartwood, in quest of heartwood, seeking heartwood, were to go into a forest carrying a sharp ax. There he would see a large banana tree: straight, young, of enormous height. He would cut it at the root and, having cut it at the root, would chop off the top. Having chopped off the top, he would peel away the outer skin. Peeling away the outer skin, he wouldn't even find sapwood, to say nothing of heartwood. Then a man with good eyesight would see it, observe it, & appropriately examine it. To him — seeing it, observing it, & appropriately examining it — it would appear empty, void, without substance: for what substance would there be in a banana tree? In the same way, a monk sees, observes, & appropriately examines any fabrications that are past, future, or present; internal or external; blatant or subtle; common or sublime; far or near. To him — seeing them, observing them, & appropriately examining them — they would appear empty, void, without substance: for what substance would there be in fabrications?

I observe them in accordance with the Buddha's instructions as detailed here.

mikenz66 wrote:Take walking, for example. What labels would you use to describe the difference between intention to lift the foot and the motion of the foot?

There being no substance in any designation I could attach, I would see no benefit in superimposing it upon the direct experience. It would be like wrapping what was being experienced in the skin of a banana tree.

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: 14650
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 9:52 pm
Location: Melbourne, Australia

Re: Fabrication

Postby mikenz66 » Tue Feb 07, 2012 7:29 am

Where did this reality stuff come from? As Tilt, says, it's all empty.

But I don't understand how you propose to understand that emptiness experientially unless you can discern the causation/fabrication/etc. The connection between intention and motion, for example.

:anjali:
Mike
User avatar
mikenz66
 
Posts: 10229
Joined: Sat Jan 10, 2009 7:37 am
Location: New Zealand

Re: Fabrication

Postby retrofuturist » Tue Feb 07, 2012 7:39 am

Greetings Mike,

mikenz66 wrote:As Tilt, says, it's all empty.

Indeed it is. The words that Tilt spoke were accurate and in accord with the Buddha's teachings on sunnata.

MN 122: Maha-sunnata Sutta wrote:So, Ananda, if a monk should wish, 'May I enter & remain in internal emptiness,' then he should get the mind steadied right within, settled, unified, & concentrated. And how…..? There is the case where a monk — quite withdrawn from sensual pleasures, withdrawn from unskillful qualities — enters & remains in the first jhana... the second jhana... the third jhana... the fourth jhana: purity of equanimity & mindfulness, neither-pleasure-nor-pain. That is how a monk gets the mind steadied right within, settled, unified, & concentrated.
"He attends to internal emptiness. While he is attending to internal emptiness, his mind does not take pleasure, find satisfaction, grow steady, or indulge in internal emptiness. When this is the case, he discerns, 'While I am attending to internal emptiness, my mind does not take pleasure, find satisfaction, grow steady, or indulge in internal emptiness.' In this way he is alert there.
"He attends to external emptiness...
"He attends to internal & external emptiness...
"He attends to the imperturbable. While he is attending to the imperturbable, his mind does not take pleasure, find satisfaction, grow steady, or indulge in the imperturbable. When this is the case, he discerns, 'While I am attending to the imperturbable, my mind does not take pleasure, find satisfaction, grow steady, or indulge in the imperturbable.' In this way he is alert there.
"When that is the case, he should get the mind steadied right within, settled, unified, & concentrated in his first theme of concentration.
"He then attends to internal emptiness. While he is attending to internal emptiness, his mind takes pleasure, finds satisfaction, grows steady, & indulges in internal emptiness. When this is the case, he discerns, 'While I am attending to internal emptiness, my mind takes pleasure, finds satisfaction, grows steady, & indulges in internal emptiness.' In this way he is alert there.
"He attends to external emptiness...
"He attends to internal & external emptiness...
"He attends to the imperturbable. While he is attending to the imperturbable, his mind takes pleasure, finds satisfaction, grows steady, & indulges in the imperturbable. When this is the case, he discerns, 'While I am attending to the imperturbable, my mind takes pleasure, finds satisfaction, grows steady, & indulges in the imperturbable.' In this way he is alert there.
"If, while the monk is dwelling by means of this dwelling, his mind inclines to walking back & forth, he walks back & forth [thinking,] 'While I am walking thus, no covetousness or sadness, no evil, unskillful qualities will take possession of me.' In this way he is alert there.
"If, while he is dwelling by means of this dwelling, his mind inclines to standing... to sitting... to lying down, he lies down, [thinking,] 'While I am lying down thus, no covetousness or sadness, no evil, unskillful qualities will take possession of me.' In this way he is alert there."

Furthermore, in the following sutta we see how the Buddha encourages an experience that is as direct as possible, and not filtered through subsequent layers of fabrication.

MN 1: Mulapariyaya Sutta wrote:"A monk who is a trainee — yearning for the unexcelled relief from bondage, his aspirations as yet unfulfilled — directly knows earth as earth. Directly knowing earth as earth, let him not conceive things about earth, let him not conceive things in earth, let him not conceive things coming out of earth, let him not conceive earth as 'mine,' let him not delight in earth. Why is that? So that he may comprehend it, I tell you.

"He directly knows water as water... fire as fire... wind as wind... beings as beings... gods as gods... Pajapati as Pajapati... Brahma as Brahma... the luminous gods as luminous gods... the gods of refulgent glory as gods of refulgent glory... the gods of abundant fruit as the gods of abundant fruit... the Great Being as the Great Being... the dimension of the infinitude of space as the dimension of the infinitude of space... the dimension of the infinitude of consciousness as the dimension of the infinitude of consciousness... the dimension of nothingness as the dimension of nothingness... the dimension of neither-perception-nor-non-perception as the dimension of neither-perception-nor-non-perception... the seen as the seen... the heard as the heard... the sensed as the sensed... the cognized as the cognized... singleness as singleness... multiplicity as multiplicity... the All as the All...

"He directly knows Unbinding as Unbinding. Directly knowing Unbinding as Unbinding, let him not conceive things about Unbinding, let him not conceive things in Unbinding, let him not conceive things coming out of Unbinding, let him not conceive Unbinding as 'mine,' let him not delight in Unbinding. Why is that? So that he may comprehend it, I tell you.


mikenz66 wrote:But I don't understand how you propose to understand that emptiness experientially unless you can discern the causation/fabrication/etc. The connection between intention and motion, for example.

Well, the above suttas provide such details, but more generally I apply the classifications used by Bhikkhuni Dhammadinna.

MN 44: Culavedalla Sutta wrote:"Now, lady, what are fabrications?"

"These three fabrications, friend Visakha: bodily fabrications, verbal fabrications, & mental fabrications."

"But what are bodily fabrications? What are verbal fabrications? What are mental fabrications?"

"In-&-out breaths are bodily fabrications. Directed thought & evaluation are verbal fabrications. Perceptions & feelings are mental fabrications."

"But why are in-&-out breaths bodily fabrications? Why are directed thought & evaluation verbal fabrications? Why are perceptions & feelings mental fabrications?"

"In-&-out breaths are bodily; these are things tied up with the body. That's why in-&-out breaths are bodily fabrications. Having first directed one's thoughts and made an evaluation, one then breaks out into speech. That's why directed thought & evaluation are verbal fabrications. Perceptions & feelings are mental; these are things tied up with the mind. That's why perceptions & feelings are mental fabrications."

MN 44 later goes on to give details as to how each classification of sankhara are tranquilized.

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: 14650
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 9:52 pm
Location: Melbourne, Australia

Re: Fabrication

Postby mikenz66 » Tue Feb 07, 2012 7:46 am

So you observe how those things arise?
That's what I said, I thought.

:anjali:
Mike
User avatar
mikenz66
 
Posts: 10229
Joined: Sat Jan 10, 2009 7:37 am
Location: New Zealand

Re: Fabrication

Postby retrofuturist » Tue Feb 07, 2012 7:48 am

Greetings Mike,

mikenz66 wrote:So you observe how those things arise?

Yes, I observe how those sankharas listed by Ayya Dhammadinna arise.

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: 14650
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 9:52 pm
Location: Melbourne, Australia

Re: Fabrication

Postby mikenz66 » Tue Feb 07, 2012 7:54 am

retrofuturist wrote:... the Buddha encourages an experience that is as direct as possible, and not filtered through subsequent layers of fabrication.

Which is precisely the point I've always tried to make in various interminable discussions that usually get derailed by that silly "reality" straw person.

So, no disagreement here... :hug:

:anjali:
Mike
User avatar
mikenz66
 
Posts: 10229
Joined: Sat Jan 10, 2009 7:37 am
Location: New Zealand

PreviousNext

Return to General Theravāda discussion

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 6 guests