anatta and cetana and conditions for right view

Discussion of Abhidhamma and related Commentaries
Post Reply
User avatar
robertk
Posts: 5603
Joined: Sat Jan 03, 2009 2:08 am

Re: anatta and cetana (will, intention): Kamma negated?

Post by robertk »

Mike If you could give some details on the points ypu think they makes I will be happy to reply. I am afraid i cannot understand anyhing he writes so it is hard for me to follow. I admire you and tam who can understand him apparently.
mikenz66 wrote:Hi DF,
dhamma follower wrote: Perhaps you are missing the point :-).
Sorry. I think it is you that is missing the point. theY asked some pertinant questions about mixing suttana terms with abhidhamma terms. I pointed out that uncontrollability of individual citta does not negate the possibility of conditioning things, which appears to be a key part of your argument. Since you are relying on some rather technical Abhidhamma developments, it would be prudent to check out theY's queries in detail, rather than repeat these rather simplistic "Is understanding happening now?" questions. That question can be equally asked to anyone, including KS, so actually proves nothing.

In the hands of a skilful teacher, which I presume KS is (and I am reasonably certain many other non-KS followers are are) that sort of question-and-answer can be quite valuable. But it does not answer any of the concerns that have been raised. You continue to argue with the assumption that what you believe to be true is true.

Furethermore, as far as I understand it, the whole theory you are suggesting is based on an interpretation of late Commentary on the Abhidhamma. [I may be mistaken, but in that case perhaps you can point to where this billions of mind-moments per second is recorded in the Abhidhamma itself.]

As I said, discussion is interesting, because it may well expose wrong view on both sides.

:anjali:
Mike
User avatar
mikenz66
Posts: 19932
Joined: Sat Jan 10, 2009 7:37 am
Location: Aotearoa, New Zealand

Re: anatta and cetana (will, intention): Kamma negated?

Post by mikenz66 »

Hi Robert,

I don't really understand the points because I don't have that sort of knowledge of the Pali but I gather that the gist of the argument is inappropriate mixing of sutta and abhidhamma and/or commentarial terminology. Perhaps that gives you enough to go on.

:anjali:
Mike
dhamma follower
Posts: 354
Joined: Fri Nov 06, 2009 5:48 am

Re: anatta and cetana (will, intention): Kamma negated?

Post by dhamma follower »

mikenz66 wrote:Hi Robert,

I don't really understand the points because I don't have that sort of knowledge of the Pali but I gather that the gist of the argument is inappropriate mixing of sutta and abhidhamma and/or commentarial terminology. Perhaps that gives you enough to go on.

:anjali:
Mike
To which I have addressed in my above post to TheY. He is welcome to reply and present his counter argument. The mixing of terminology is not a problem per se. And think we can agree to say that even though the Buddha was using conventional term such as "I", "bikkhu", bhavana, it doesn't mean that he was saying that there is truly a person behind those terms. In the satipatthana sutta, he is using both terms denoting such conventional truth and paramatha dhammas.

We tend to separate the Sutta from the Abhidhamma, as though they talked about different realities, but how can it be? The Buddha taught about dhammas, kusala and akusala, how they are conditioned, how there can be an end to that dependent originations. That's the essence in both.
Furethermore, as far as I understand it, the whole theory you are suggesting is based on an interpretation of late Commentary on the Abhidhamma. [I may be mistaken, but in that case perhaps you can point to where this billions of mind-moments per second is recorded in the Abhidhamma itself.]
The main message that I was trying to present doesn't require this billion of mind-moments per second theory. The very basic concepts found in the sutta such as: anatta, dependent originations, the five khandas, the twelve ayatana, rupa etc... are already enough to support AS' main points.

And if you agree that the moment of seeing is not the same than the moment of hearing, smelling, touching and thinking, then it follows that citta must arise and fall away extremely rapidly, otherwise we could not experience life as we do.

Brgds,
beeblebrox
Posts: 939
Joined: Thu Dec 31, 2009 10:41 pm

Re: anatta and cetana (will, intention): Kamma negated?

Post by beeblebrox »

theY wrote:
UhBaUnTaUh wrote: She thought management is atta. In addition, she taught cetana is management. Another, she taught cetana is anatta. (I'm not mistake typing any character in this line.)
Above will clearly see if we think to her answer when someone ask her "How to practice, do, satipaṭṭhāna ?"

Because she often answer like "You don't have to do anything", then "Sati just arise itself". Who don't think "management is atta" when listen that sentences?
To comment on UhbaUnTaUh's quote (whether it's accurate, or not)... I think that's a serious misgrasp of anatta. The main problem lies in trying to attach "atta" as a label to something like "management," or really, to anything. If we read the suttas (and maybe even abhidhamma), we don't ever see the Buddha and/or commentators using "atta" in that way. Why not? Because "atta" in itself is an illusory construction. It is not a term which can be seen as something permanent, unchanging, or reliable.

If a person makes an attempt to label something as "atta," and then tries to cling to that as something definitive, then I think only dukkha (or confusion) will ensue... because of making that kind of statement. It's the main point behind the Buddha's formula: "Is this something permanent or not...? If it's impermanent, then should it be seen as something reliable, or not? If it's not reliable, then why see a self in it?"

"Management" is just a bunch of conditions that came together... nothing more, nothing less. If that kind of formation arises, then I think that's a beneficial formation. Why beneficial? Because when there is a "management," then you can manage your time in such a way where you'll end up being able to read the Dhamma, very carefully. You'll have as much time as you'd like to read, because your time was well-managed. I think that this would always be a good thing... to try to see it otherwise, I don't think it could be called a wise behavior.

To go back to the topic of this thread... when someone thinks that kamma is negated because of anatta... then that only means he's been trying to view kamma using "atta" as a reference point (i.e., if there's no atta, then that must mean that there's no kamma)... that can't be called right view. It comes from misgrasping anatta.

:anjali:
User avatar
mikenz66
Posts: 19932
Joined: Sat Jan 10, 2009 7:37 am
Location: Aotearoa, New Zealand

Re: anatta and cetana (will, intention): Kamma negated?

Post by mikenz66 »

Hi DF,
dhamma follower wrote: The main message that I was trying to present doesn't require this billion of mind-moments per second theory. The very basic concepts found in the sutta such as: anatta, dependent originations, the five khandas, the twelve ayatana, rupa etc... are already enough to support AS' main points.,
I guess I've missed that, because it certainly is not clear to me.

Despite repeated conversations (mostly online) with various KS advocates I've not heard a convincing reason why not being able to directly control citta presents a problem to development. [The Buddha said that rupa cannot be controlled, for example, but obviously that doesn't refer to the fact that doing certain things affects our bodies positively or negatively; and so on for the other aggregates...]

And, if it did, we all have the exact same problem. You seem to be arguing that a certain way of going about things is going to give better results in the long term than other methods. (If you're not, why would it be important?) But this is just as much a particular view/method as anyone else's view/method regarding Dhamma, so you (or some succession of citta if you prefer) would be subject to exactly the same criticisms that you are making.

:anjali:
Mike
dhamma follower
Posts: 354
Joined: Fri Nov 06, 2009 5:48 am

Re: anatta and cetana (will, intention): Kamma negated?

Post by dhamma follower »

Dear Mike,
Despite repeated conversations (mostly online) with various KS advocates I've not heard a convincing reason why not being able to directly control citta presents a problem to development. [The Buddha said that rupa cannot be controlled, for example, but obviously that doesn't refer to the fact that doing certain things affects our bodies positively or negatively; and so on for the other aggregates...]
Not being able to control cittas is not the problem. The problem is the wrong understanding about them.
And, if it did, we all have the exact same problem. You seem to be arguing that a certain way of going about things is going to give better results in the long term than other methods. (If you're not, why would it be important?) But this is just as much a particular view/method as anyone else's view/method regarding Dhamma, so you (or some succession of citta if you prefer) would be subject to exactly the same criticisms that you are making.
Let’s see what we have agreed so far:
- That all conditioned dhammas (including sati, viriya, panna) arise by their own condition. They can not by forced to arise by will (cetana)
- Cetana is also a conditioned dhamma.
- The conditions for the arising of sati and panna is: listening to the right dhamma, wise cinsideration (yoniso manasikara) – which is also a conditioned dhamma.

Until here I guess there’s no problem.

Now you seem to be saying that because there are conditions for the arising of sati and panna, we can create those “conditions”. Let’s examine if it’s true.
I have listened to AS, found the value of it, and now want to listen to her again.
- the cetana to listen to her again is conditioned by the understanding gained from listening to her previously (which is conditioned by previous accumulations...)
- Even with cetana to listen to her again, whether new listening occurs or not depends on many conditions: the ear must still be functioning; the source of her teaching must be available.... We might take these for granted, but it is all up to vipaka of past kamma, accumulations and other factors whether ear-base arises or not, whether the the sound (of her voice) arises or not, whether understanding as the result of that listening arises or not.

If we consider that way, there’s not “active conditioning” (by a self) at all. Does that mean we shouldn’t do anything? Not at all. Some of us like to go to retreats, some study by them-selves, some read Ven Nanananda’s books, some fly to BKK to meet AS…All these things still happen no matter what, but not because of “active conditioning” by s.o, but because of complex conditions.

Do you agree with this?

Now back to the condition : “listening to the right Dhamma”. Some people listen to Krishnamurti, others to the Pope, others to Achaan Brahm, others to Pa-auk Sayadaw, others to AS… All these people think that they are hearing the truth. However the messages of all the above mentioned teachers vary to different degrees. But if the Buddha mentioned the right Dhamma, it means there must be one Dhamma which is true, while others, if different from it must not be true. What can recognize the right Dhamma other than right understanding or right view of dhammas as taught by the Buddha? And the core of the teaching, I think we can agree, is ‘all dhammas are not-self, arising and falling away by conditions”.

I don’t think I even attempt to convince anyone here. Whether someone accepts the arguments above depends on their accumulations. And again, I’d like to stretch, the path it’s not about doing something, but it is about understanding. There’s no method (since you mentioned AS method versus others). AS doesn’t teach any method. She only tries to help others to understand rightly the dhamma which arises now. If right understanding is there, the path is being cultivated. Apart from those moments, at all other moments of not understanding( be it while cooking at home, sitting on a meditation cushion, listening to AS...) we just go on perpetuating samsara. There are other aspects of the Teaching: on kusala versus akusala in dana, sila, and samatha. It is wonderful to hear about these things too. However, what really distinguishes the Buddha’s teaching from others, is precisely this message on anatta, which needs to be thoroughly discussed and rightly understood, and it should not be separated from reality now (seeing now, hearing now....)

Any common ground, any disagreement?

Brgrds,

D.F
User avatar
mikenz66
Posts: 19932
Joined: Sat Jan 10, 2009 7:37 am
Location: Aotearoa, New Zealand

Re: anatta and cetana (will, intention): Kamma negated?

Post by mikenz66 »

Hi DF,

Lots of common ground. Key disagreement is clearly over:
1. Who to listen to. [My working hypothesis, based on meeting and listening to a number of teachers is that the key features of the Buddha's teaching has been preserved adequately by all the teachers you mention.]
2. Your insistence that what you choose to do somehow magically avoids the same criticisms over attachment, etc, that you level at other approaches.

Clearly we are not going to agree on those points. It would be more interesting to examine how much other teachers are aligned with KS's arguments. I would say, quite a lot if you don't keep insisting it is something so special that it avoids all problems.

:anjali:
Mike
SamKR
Posts: 1037
Joined: Sun Jul 19, 2009 4:33 pm

Re: anatta and cetana (will, intention): Kamma negated?

Post by SamKR »

dhamma follower wrote: Any common ground, any disagreement?
Supporting Mike's post and his two points above, I also I don't see any other significant thing to disagree with what you said. Nevertheless, I think many people find it useful to have "observation of phenomena" (anicca, dukkha, anatta) while sitting on a cushion after “listening to the right Dhamma”, and I cannot still see anything wrong with that (based on your post above).
dhamma follower
Posts: 354
Joined: Fri Nov 06, 2009 5:48 am

Re: anatta and cetana (will, intention): Kamma negated?

Post by dhamma follower »

SamKR wrote: Nevertheless, I think many people find it useful to have "observation of phenomena" (anicca, dukkha, anatta) while sitting on a cushion after “listening to the right Dhamma”, and I cannot still see anything wrong with that (based on your post above).
Dear Sam,

I have two questions:
- why sitting on a cushion should be chosen as opposed to going to the market after listening to the right Dhamma?
- what is anicca, dukkha, anatta?

Brgds,
D.F
dhamma follower
Posts: 354
Joined: Fri Nov 06, 2009 5:48 am

Re: anatta and cetana (will, intention): Kamma negated?

Post by dhamma follower »

Dear Mike,
Your insistence that what you choose to do somehow magically avoids the same criticisms over attachment, etc, that you level at other approaches.
Haven't I said many times the the path is not about doing? It is made up from moments of right understanding. Right understanding is always right and free from attachment. I, as a "person" puthujana, can have both moments of right and wrong understanding. My moment of wrong understanding can be subject of criticism, but my moment of right understanding is not, otherwise would not be called "right". You, or anyone, is invited to point out where my understanding of realities is wrong, I will be very grateful. Actually, it is great kusala to point out others' wrong understandings.
It would be more interesting to examine how much other teachers are aligned with KS's arguments
Why only the common points? Why don't also examine the points they differ?

Thanks for keep going with the discussion,

Brgrds,
D.F
User avatar
robertk
Posts: 5603
Joined: Sat Jan 03, 2009 2:08 am

Re: anatta and cetana (will, intention): Kamma negated?

Post by robertk »

Mike,
let's look at the idea, often put forward, that there can be continuous mindfulness. Today on another thread you wrote that http://www.dhammawheel.com/viewtopic.ph ... 73#p217473" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
" on retreats it can be very helpful to maintain mindfulness at all times.".
To me any idea of being able to maintain mindfulness, (or for that matter even make it arise for a moment) is wrong. It is opposed to the truth of anatta and the uncontrollabilty of phenomena. Sati of satipatthana always arises with sampajanna, wisdom, and specifically wisdom related to anatta.

robert
User avatar
tiltbillings
Posts: 23046
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2008 9:25 am

Re: anatta and cetana (will, intention): Kamma negated?

Post by tiltbillings »

robertk wrote:Mike,
let's look at the idea, often put forward, that there can be continuous mindfulness. Today on another thread you wrote that http://www.dhammawheel.com/viewtopic.ph ... 73#p217473" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
" on retreats it can be very helpful to maintain mindfulness at all times.".
To me any idea of being able to maintain mindfulness, (or for that matter even make it arise for a moment) is wrong. It is opposed to the truth of anatta and the uncontrollabilty of phenomena. Sati of satipatthana always arises with sampajanna, wisdom, and specifically wisdom related to anatta.

robert
You typed this msg, which would then strongly suggest that "the truth of anatta and the uncontrollabilty of phenomena" might be something a bit different than what you seem to be suggesting.
>> 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
User avatar
mikenz66
Posts: 19932
Joined: Sat Jan 10, 2009 7:37 am
Location: Aotearoa, New Zealand

Re: anatta and cetana (will, intention): Kamma negated?

Post by mikenz66 »

Hi Robert,

I don't mean that one can achieve sati at all times, if at all. I probably should not use "mindfulness" but some more generic term like "pay attention".

DF:
I'm sorry, perhaps I was not clear enough.
dhamma follower wrote:Haven't I said many times the the path is not about doing? It is made up from moments of right understanding? ...
This statement, to me, despite all your protestations to the contrary, suggests that you have a particular idea of how the path works, and your choices of action are governed by that understanding.

I'm sorry, but I see no difference between those choices and the choices to use any other method (setting aside the rightness or wrongness of your or my particular method). In both cases choices of action (or inaction) are made.

Of course the path is not about doing but about the moments of right understanding. Who has ever suggested otherwise? However, doing is happening all the time, and certain doing is obviously more conducive to developing that right understanding. I presume you don't advocate killing, speaking harshly, or engaging in sexual misconduct? Are there not choices being made regarding those actions?

:anjali:
Mike
dhamma follower
Posts: 354
Joined: Fri Nov 06, 2009 5:48 am

Re: anatta and cetana (will, intention): Kamma negated?

Post by dhamma follower »

Dear Mike,
dhamma follower wrote:Haven't I said many times the the path is not about doing? It is made up from moments of right understanding? ...
This statement, to me, despite all your protestations to the contrary, suggests that you have a particular idea of how the path works
I do have a particular idea of how the path works, and it is the one taught by the Buddha:
listening to the right Dhamma from a wise spiritual friend and wise consideration (yonisomanasikara), all by conditions.
and your choices of action are governed by that understanding.
This can be done either with the understanding that it is conditioned, or it is done with a wrong idea of self.
I'm sorry, but I see no difference between those choices and the choices to use any other method (setting aside the rightness or wrongness of your or my particular method). In both cases choices of action (or inaction) are made.
The difference lies in:
- whether the choice made is conditioned by the right understanding of anattaness or by misunderstanding that things can happen at will.
- like above: the choice can be done with right understanding that it is just conditioned or with a wrong idea of self
Of course the path is not about doing but about the moments of right understanding. Who has ever suggested otherwise? However, doing is happening all the time, and certain doing is obviously more conducive to developing that right understanding. I presume you don't advocate killing, speaking harshly, or engaging in sexual misconduct? Are there not choices being made regarding those actions?
Like above, choice and doing are conditioned, and can be done with right understanding or a wrong idea of self .


Brgrds,
DF
User avatar
mikenz66
Posts: 19932
Joined: Sat Jan 10, 2009 7:37 am
Location: Aotearoa, New Zealand

Re: anatta and cetana (will, intention): Kamma negated?

Post by mikenz66 »

Hi DF,
dhamma follower wrote: I do have a particular idea of how the path works, and it is the one taught by the Buddha:
listening to the right Dhamma from a wise spiritual friend and wise consideration (yonisomanasikara), all by conditions.

The difference lies in:
- whether the choice made is conditioned by the right understanding of anattaness or by misunderstanding that things can happen at will.
Of course, we've (and any teachers I've spent time studying) always agreed on this. "Control" is not possible ("let my form/feeling/etc.. be thus...). Choice of development approach is, as in: "listening to the Dhamma from a wise spiritual friend..."
dhamma follower wrote: - like above: the choice can be done with right understanding that it is just conditioned or with a wrong idea of self
So the key questions are:
1. Whether your "listening to the Dhamma from a wise spiritual friend..." is done with correct understanding.
2. Whether some other activity recommended by my (hopefully) wise spiritual friends and teachers (and, it seems, by the Buddha, according to our reading of the Suttas, Abhidhamma, and Commentary) are done with correct understanding.

At least, that's how I understand it so far...

Since, as far as I understand my teachers, it is not possible to exercise control by will, I don't see where you think that problem lies. Probably in my wrong understanding of self, which is going to be with me for some time, according to the Suttas...

:anjali:
Mike
Post Reply