Aggregates v. clinging aggregates

A discussion on all aspects of Theravāda Buddhism

Re: Aggregates v. clinging aggregates

Postby Dmytro » Mon Dec 31, 2012 8:05 am

Hi,

SarathW wrote:Is that correct that if I say that worldly persons (Putujjana) are five aggregates and Arhants are non clinging five aggregates?


Not at all.

See:

http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka ... .than.html
http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka ... .wlsh.html
http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka ... .niza.html
http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka ... .than.html

"But if one doesn't stay obsessed with form, monk, that's not what one is measured by. Whatever one isn't measured by, that's not how one is classified.

"If one doesn't stay obsessed with feeling...

"If one doesn't stay obsessed with perception...

"If one doesn't stay obsessed with fabrications...

"If one doesn't stay obsessed with consciousness, that's not what one is measured by. Whatever one isn't measured by, that's not how one is classified.

http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka ... .than.html

"Even so, Vaccha, any physical form by which one describing the Tathagata would describe him: That the Tathagata has abandoned, its root destroyed, made like a palmyra stump, deprived of the conditions of development, not destined for future arising. Freed from the classification of form, Vaccha, the Tathagata is deep, boundless, hard to fathom, like the sea. 'Reappears' doesn't apply. 'Does not reappear' doesn't apply. 'Both does & does not reappear' doesn't apply. 'Neither reappears nor does not reappear' doesn't apply.

"Any feeling... Any perception... Any mental fabrication...

"Any consciousness by which one describing the Tathagata would describe him: That the Tathagata has abandoned, its root destroyed, made like a palmyra stump, deprived of the conditions of development, not destined for future arising. Freed from the classification of consciousness, Vaccha, the Tathagata is deep, boundless, hard to fathom, like the sea. 'Reappears' doesn't apply. 'Does not reappear' doesn't apply. 'Both does & does not reappear' doesn't apply. 'Neither reappears nor does not reappear' doesn't apply."

http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka ... .than.html

If you read Pali:
http://dhamma.ru/forum/index.php?topic= ... 5#msg12185
User avatar
Dmytro
 
Posts: 1161
Joined: Thu Jan 01, 2009 7:24 pm
Location: Kyiv, Ukraine

Re: Aggregates v. clinging aggregates

Postby Dmytro » Mon Dec 31, 2012 8:11 am

Hi Vincent,

vinasp wrote:"Monks, there are these four nutriments for the maintenance of beings who have come into being or for the support of those in search of a place to be born. Which four? Physical food, gross or refined; contact as the second; intellectual intention the third; and consciousness the fourth. These are the four nutriments for the maintenance of beings who have come into being or for the support of those in search of a place to be born.

"Now, these four nutriments have what as their cause, what as their origination, what as their source, what as that which brings them into play? These four nutriments have craving as their cause, craving as their origination, craving as their source, craving as that which brings them into play.

"And this craving has what as its cause, what as its origination, what as its source, what as that which brings it into play?... Feeling...[And so forth to ignorance. SN 22.11]

Link: http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka ... .than.html

This clearly shows that the item 'clinging' in DO was originally the four nutriments.


Craving is the source for four nutriments (ahara), and also for appropriation (upadana).

See the diagram http://dhamma.ru/lib/paticcas.htm

Regards, Dmytro
User avatar
Dmytro
 
Posts: 1161
Joined: Thu Jan 01, 2009 7:24 pm
Location: Kyiv, Ukraine

Previous

Return to General Theravāda discussion

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot], Google [Bot], kiwi and 6 guests