Dependent Origination

Exploring Theravāda's connections to other paths - what can we learn from other traditions, religions and philosophies?
User avatar
Dhammanando
Posts: 6490
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 10:44 pm
Location: Mae Wang Huai Rin, Li District, Lamphun

Re: Dependent Origination

Post by Dhammanando »

Hi Stuka,
stuka wrote:I have seen another of Brahmavamso's writings entitled "Some Notes on Paticcasamuppada" or similar.
Brahmavamso: Some Remarks on Paticcasamuppāda:
http://www.buddhamind.info/leftside/tea ... _brahm.htm" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
One could fill the "examples" section of the Fallacyfiles website out of this work.
Do you have an example or two?

Best wishes,
Dhammanando Bhikkhu
Rūpehi bhikkhave arūpā santatarā.
Arūpehi nirodho santataro ti.


“Bhikkhus, the formless is more peaceful than the form realms.
Cessation is more peaceful than the formless realms.”
(Santatarasutta, Iti 73)
User avatar
mikenz66
Posts: 19932
Joined: Sat Jan 10, 2009 7:37 am
Location: Aotearoa, New Zealand

Re: Dependent Origination

Post by mikenz66 »

Greetings Stuka,
Dhammanando wrote:
stuka wrote:One could fill the "examples" section of the Fallacyfiles website out of this work.
Do you have an example or two?
I, too would be interested in seeing some examples. Ajahn Brahm (in common with many others) sometimes skips over explaining different possible interpretations and has a different take on the necessity of Jhana than some other teachers, but his "serious" Dhamma writings and discussions appear to be largely mainstream Theravada. More so, in fact, than a number of other "Forest Monks".

You argument appears to be with standard Theravada interpretations, not just with Ajahn Brahm.

Metta
Mike
User avatar
stuka
Posts: 171
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2008 12:37 am

Re: Dependent Origination

Post by stuka »

Dhammanando wrote:Hi Stuka,
stuka wrote:I have seen another of Brahmavamso's writings entitled "Some Notes on Paticcasamuppada" or similar.
Brahmavamso: Some Remarks on Paticcasamuppāda:
http://www.buddhamind.info/leftside/tea ... _brahm.htm" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
One could fill the "examples" section of the Fallacyfiles website out of this work.
Do you have an example or two?

Best wishes,
Dhammanando Bhikkhu
No advocate of the "one-life" interpretation of Paticca-samuppada has ever been able to explain how Vinnanam can be something existing in this life and yet ceases in this life for an Arahat!
The Buddha wrote: "Foolish man, to whom do you know me having taught the Dhamma like this. Haven’t I taught, in various ways that consciousness is dependently arisen. Without a cause, there is no arising of consciousness.


...

Bhikkhus, consciousness is reckoned by the condition dependent upon which it arises. If consciousness arises on account of eye and forms, it is reckoned as eye consciousness. If on account of ear and sounds it arises, it is reckoned as ear consciousness. If on account of nose and smells it arises, it is reckoned as nose consciousness. If on account of tongue and tastes it arises, it is reckoned as tongue consciousness. If on account of body and touch it arises, it is reckoned as body consciousness. If on account of mind and mind-objects it arises, it is reckoned as mind consciousness. Bhikkhus, just as a fire is reckoned based on whatever that fire burns - fire ablaze on sticks is a stick fire, fire ablaze on twigs is a twig fire, fire ablaze on grass is a grass fire, fire ablaze on cowdung is a cowdung fire, fire ablaze on grain thrash is a grain thrash fire, fire ablaze on rubbish is a rubbish fire - so too is consciousness reckoned by the condition dependent upon which it arises. In the same manner consciousness arisen on account is eye and forms is eye consciousness. Consciousness arisen on account of ear and sounds is ear consciousness. Consciousness arisen on account of nose and smells is nose consciousness. Consciousness arisen on account of tongue and tastes is taste consciousness. Consciousness arisen on account of body and touch is body consciousness. Consciousness arisen on account of mind and mind-objects is mind consciousness.
Also, text without context is pretext. The essay is filled with vague "cites" to various suttas and works, but he avoids quoting exactly what he is referring to and analyzing it and relating it to his arguments.
A typical passage in this Sutta is analysed in Rune E A Johansson’s ‘Pali Buddhist Texts - explained to the beginner’. I recommend that you find this book, look up the passage on pages 66 and 67 and see how the word Sankhara is used in the meaning of a willed activity of body, speech or mind which causes rebirth.
The meaning of Bhava can be found at Anguttara Nikaya, Book Of The Threes, Sutta 76. Look this up in Pali and you will relish its deeper meaning.


Lastly, it becomes obvious that the full Paticca-samuppada cannot be interpreted as existing in one life when one looks at the first 3 links in reverse order: When Avijja ceases so does Sankhara and, consequently, so does Vinnanam. In other words the ending of Avijja causes the ending of Vinnanam. Now what type of Vinnanam can possibly cease as a result of a person eradicating Avijja, the ignorance of the full meaning of the Four Noble Truths? We all know that an Arahat, one who has eradicated Avijja, remains fully conscious, retaining Vinnanam, after his attainment. He does not become unconscious at the moment of his attainment, ever more to be comatose until he dies! So Vinnanam cannot mean the ordinary, arising in every moment, type of consciousness
This is a Straw Man. Also, this same argument , based upon the same assumptions, negates the "three-lives" argument. We have already discussed Dependent Co-Arising as a concomitant process, and we have discussed its role as explaining how the influence of ignorance on mental processes causes suffering. (Ignorance --> The Person --> Suffering). Brahmavamso's argument doesn't touch that at all.

...and so on...You are a scholar, Bhante. You know what scholarly work is not. Brahmavamso is preaching to the choir, writing for the sort of audience who would not be likely to challenge his specious arguments.
Last edited by stuka on Sun Jan 18, 2009 5:17 am, edited 2 times in total.
User avatar
stuka
Posts: 171
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2008 12:37 am

Re: Dependent Origination

Post by stuka »

mikenz66 wrote: You argument appears to be with standard Theravada interpretations, not just with Ajahn Brahm.
Sounds like an Appeal to the Herd to me.
Last edited by stuka on Sun Jan 18, 2009 9:16 am, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
stuka
Posts: 171
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2008 12:37 am

Re: Dependent Origination

Post by stuka »

Peter wrote:
christopher::: wrote:How important within Buddhism is the value and practice of tolerance?
My impression from the scriptures is the Buddha himself was not tolerant of wrong view, especially if someone was claiming that wrong view was taught by the Buddha himself.

From MN 57:
Monk: "Venerable sir, there is this Punna, a son of the Koliyans and an ox-duty ascetic; that ox duty has long been taken up and practiced by him. What will be his destination? What will be his future course?"
Buddha: "Seniya, if his ox duty is perfected, it will lead him to the company of oxen; if it is not, it will lead him to hell."

I think many people would be upset by an exchange like this. They would want a Buddhist to say "Hey, if you like your ox-duty practice then go with it. We each have our own path."

From MN22:
Monk: "Lord, I understand the teaching of the Blessed One in this way that those things called 'obstructions' by the Blessed One, are not necessarily obstructive for him who pursues them."
Buddha: "Of whom do you know, foolish man, that I have taught to him the teaching in that manner?"

Again, I think many people would expect a Buddhist to say "Maybe you're right, maybe not. Go and pursue your own path and see what happens."

The fact is the Buddha tuaght what he tuaght and he didn't pussy-foot around. That said, he didn't go up to people uninvited and hit them over the head. "Hey you, what you're doing is wrong, what you believe is false." For example, he only told the ox-duty ascetic his practice would lead him to hell because the ascetic asked the Buddha three times. The first two times the Buddha said "Don't ask me that."

I think the second example hits more to your question of modern Buddhism. I think the Buddha didn't tolerate novel interpretations of his teachings and I think that tradition carried forward. When differing interpretations took hold, councils were held to determine which one was correct.

Too bad He wasn't around when the whole "3-lives" eisegesis sprang up.
User avatar
Jason
Posts: 595
Joined: Sun Jan 04, 2009 1:09 am
Location: Earth
Contact:

Re: Dependent Origination

Post by Jason »

stuka wrote:Too bad He wasn't around when the whole "3-lives" eisegesis sprang up.
Not that I agree with you 100% (in fact, I happen to believe that dependent co-arising works over many lifetimes as well as in the present moment), stuka, but H. W. Schumann offers an interesting theory about this in his book, The Historical Buddha, which I thought I would contribute to the discussion. Even though he accepts that the Buddha taught rebirth, distinguishing five levels of existence in which one can be reborn, and that kamma takes effect not in but as the new being as per SN 12.37, he goes on to state (141-42):
  • Practical requirements made it necessary to present this 'rebirth without a soul' in a readily grasped and memorized form. Accordingly, the principle of dependent origination (paticca-samuppada) discovered by the Buddha was converted into the formula of dependent origination. It is not probable that Gotama himself actually formulated this conditional nexus of twelve links: it is more probably the work of early monks. As material they used three separate short chains of conditionality which the Master had used in sermons, and joined them up, irrespective of the fact that the twelve-linked chain thus created comprises three separate existences in a series of rebirths, but uses different terms to describe each of these existences. Nevertheless, the early monks considered this formula as such an important recognition that in compiling the Pali Canon they attributed it to the Buddha.
To counter this particular kind of argument, though, it should be noted that according to Thanissaro Bhikkhu, even in the shorter chains, the other links are implicit. For example, he mentions that there are alternative patterns to the traditional twelve links such as where the Buddha starts out at sensory contact, but all the factors are there, e.g., in the one with ten factors, you have consciousness and name-and-form acting as causes and conditions for each other, however, fabrications and ignorance are included under name.
"Sabbe dhamma nalam abhinivesaya" (AN 7.58).

leaves in the hand (Buddhist-related blog)
leaves in the forest (non-Buddhist related blog)
Element

Re: Dependent Origination

Post by Element »

stuka wrote: Lastly, it becomes obvious that the full Paticca-samuppada cannot be interpreted as existing in one life when one looks at the first 3 links in reverse order: When Avijja ceases so does Sankhara and, consequently, so does Vinnanam. In other words the ending of Avijja causes the ending of Vinnanam. Now what type of Vinnanam can possibly cease as a result of a person eradicating Avijja, the ignorance of the full meaning of the Four Noble Truths? We all know that an Arahat, one who has eradicated Avijja, remains fully conscious, retaining Vinnanam, after his attainment. He does not become unconscious at the moment of his attainment, ever more to be comatose until he dies! So Vinnanam cannot mean the ordinary, arising in every moment, type of consciousness
For me, Ajahn Brahm has based his reasoning on the dubious but salient translation of nirodha as 'cessation'. I am inclined towards the view that nirodha means quenching or extinguished, like the flames of a fire or thirst is quenched or extinguished. What is left is not nothingness. What is remains is cool faculties, serene consciousness, Nibbana. This the Buddha describes clearly in SN 22.53, the Upaya Sutta.
When that consciousness is unestablished, not coming to growth, nongenerative, it is liberated. By being liberated, it is steady; by being steady, it is content; by being content, he is not agitated. Being not agitated, he personally attains Nibbana. He understands: 'Destroyed is birth, the holy life has been lived, what had to be done has been done, there is no more for this state of being'.
Element

Re: Dependent Origination

Post by Element »

Elohim wrote:... you have consciousness and name-and-form acting as causes and conditions for each other, however, fabrications and ignorance are included under name.
For me, a misunderstanding arises in the Pali. The Buddha spoke: 'anicca paccaya sankhara'. Only three words. Paccaya here is a verb. Buddha said: "ignorance conditions fabricators". The fabricators or sankhara are clearly defined in the suttas (MN 9 & MN 44) as the breathing in & breathing out, vitakka & vicara and perception & feeling. These fabricators under the influence of ignorance condition consciousness and the mind-body, in that they make consciousness cloudy or stained and the mind-body disturbed with hindrances. Consciousness is stained by the asava so it does not see clearly. It is not clear, luminous or serene consciousness. It is crazed consciousness, as the Buddha would say:
"Householder, your faculties are not those of one who is steady in his own mind. There is an aberration in your faculties."

MN 87
It is common to think of dependent origination as giving rise to the existence of consciousness and the mind-body. For me, this is not the case. Ignorance & its nutriment, the five hindrances, condition the body & mind to make them agitated, disturbed and primed to seek an object via the sense bases. The body & mind are primed to experience dukkha.
In dependence on the sensuality element [anusaya] there arises sensual perception; in dependence on the sensual perception there arises sensual intention; in dependence on the sensual intention there arises sensual desire; in dependence on the sensual desire there arises sensual passion; in dependence on the sensual passion there arises a sensual quest. Engaged in a sensual quest, the uninstructed worldling conducts himself wrongly in three ways - with body, speech and mind.

SN 14.12
This is my understanding and interpretation through meditation practise.

With metta,

Element
User avatar
stuka
Posts: 171
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2008 12:37 am

Re: Dependent Origination

Post by stuka »

Element wrote:
Elohim wrote:... you have consciousness and name-and-form acting as causes and conditions for each other, however, fabrications and ignorance are included under name.
For me, a misunderstanding arises in the Pali. The Buddha spoke: 'anicca paccaya sankhara'. Only three words. Paccaya here is a verb. Buddha said: "ignorance conditions fabricators". The fabricators or sankhara are clearly defined in the suttas (MN 9 & MN 44) as the breathing in & breathing out, vitakka & vicara and perception & feeling. These fabricators under the influence of ignorance condition consciousness and the mind-body, in that they make consciousness cloudy or stained and the mind-body disturbed with hindrances. Consciousness is stained by the asava so it does not see clearly. It is not clear, luminous or serene consciousness. It is crazed consciousness, as the Buddha would say:
"Householder, your faculties are not those of one who is steady in his own mind. There is an aberration in your faculties."

MN 87
It is common to think of dependent origination as giving rise to the existence of consciousness and the mind-body. For me, this is not the case. Ignorance & its nutriment, the five hindrances, condition the body & mind to make them agitated, disturbed and primed to seek an object via the sense bases. The body & mind are primed to experience dukkha.
In dependence on the sensuality element [anusaya] there arises sensual perception; in dependence on the sensual perception there arises sensual intention; in dependence on the sensual intention there arises sensual desire; in dependence on the sensual desire there arises sensual passion; in dependence on the sensual passion there arises a sensual quest. Engaged in a sensual quest, the uninstructed worldling conducts himself wrongly in three ways - with body, speech and mind.

SN 14.12
This is my understanding and interpretation through meditation practise.

With metta,

Element
:goodpost: :clap:
Element

Re: Dependent Origination

Post by Element »

stuka wrote:Lastly, it becomes obvious that the full Paticca-samuppada cannot be interpreted as existing in one life when one looks at the first 3 links in reverse order: When Avijja ceases so does Sankhara and, consequently, so does Vinnanam. In other words the ending of Avijja causes the ending of Vinnanam. Now what type of Vinnanam can possibly cease as a result of a person eradicating Avijja, the ignorance of the full meaning of the Four Noble Truths? We all know that an Arahat, one who has eradicated Avijja, remains fully conscious, retaining Vinnanam, after his attainment. He does not become unconscious at the moment of his attainment, ever more to be comatose until he dies! So Vinnanam cannot mean the ordinary, arising in every moment, type of consciousness
Ajahn Brahm is also caught out by the Upanisa Sutta. Here, the cessation of consciousness is not mentioned in relation to the cessation of dukkha.
In the same way, monks, ignorance is the supporting condition for formations, formations are the supporting condition for consciousness, consciousness is the supporting condition for mentality-materiality, mentality-materiality is the supporting condition for the sixfold sense base, the sixfold sense base is the supporting condition for contact, contact is the supporting condition for feeling, feeling is the supporting condition for craving, craving is the supporting condition for clinging, clinging is the supporting condition for existence, existence is the supporting condition for birth, birth is the supporting condition for suffering, suffering is the supporting condition for faith, faith is the supporting condition for joy, joy is the supporting condition for rapture, rapture is the supporting condition for tranquillity, tranquillity is the supporting condition for happiness, happiness is the supporting condition for concentration, concentration is the supporting condition for the knowledge and vision of things as they really are, the knowledge and vision of things as they really are is the supporting condition for disenchantment, disenchantment is the supporting condition for dispassion, dispassion is the supporting condition for emancipation and emancipation is the supporting condition for the knowledge of the destruction of the cankers.
User avatar
stuka
Posts: 171
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2008 12:37 am

Re: Dependent Origination

Post by stuka »

Brahma vamso wrote:In particular you will see that Jati can only mean birth, the sort of birth which for a human occurs in a mother’s womb:
"Bhikkhus, from what do these four supports originate, rise, take birth and develop?

"These four supports originate, rise, take birth and develop from craving.

"Bhikkhus, from what does craving originate, rise, take birth and develop?

"Craving originates, rises, takes birth and develops from feelings.

"Bhikkhus, from what do feelings originate, rise, take birth and develop?

"Feelings originate, rise, take birth and develop from contact.

"Bhikkhus, from what does contact originate, rise, take birth and develop?
....
"Contact originates, rises, takes birth and develops from the sixfold sense base.

"Bhikkhus, from what does the sixfold sense base originate, rise, take birth and develop?

"The sixfold sense base originates, rises, takes birth and develops from name and form.

"Bhikkhus, from what do name and form originate, rise, take birth and develop?

"Name and form originate, rise, take birth and develop from consciousness.

"Bhikkhus, from what does consciousness originate, rise, take birth and develop?.

"Consciousness originates rises, takes birth and develops from [volitional] formations.

"Bhikkhus, from what do [volitional] formations originate, rise, take birth and develop?

"[Volitional] Formations originate, rise, take birth and develop from ignorance.


.....Whole Lotta Birthin' Goin On.... :rofl:
User avatar
Cittasanto
Posts: 6646
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 10:31 pm
Location: Ellan Vannin
Contact:

Re: Dependent Origination

Post by Cittasanto »

Hi Dhammanando
Dhammanando wrote:Hi Stuka,
stuka wrote:I have seen another of Brahmavamso's writings entitled "Some Notes on Paticcasamuppada" or similar.
Brahmavamso: Some Remarks on Paticcasamuppāda:
http://www.buddhamind.info/leftside/tea ... _brahm.htm" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
One could fill the "examples" section of the Fallacyfiles website out of this work.
Do you have an example or two?

Best wishes,
Dhammanando Bhikkhu
Here is the work I referred too! although from my interpretation it is just one part that differs and i disagree with and it is his interpretation of some of the suttas http://www.what-buddha-taught.net/Books ... tthana.htm" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
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
Element

Re: Dependent Origination

Post by Element »

stuka wrote: .....Whole Lotta Birthin' Goin On.... :rofl:
Friend Stuka,

I never noticed this paragraph before. Indeed, there are more births than the Royal Hospital for Women.
‘‘Cattārome, bhikkhave, āhārā bhūtānaṃ vā sattānaṃ ṭhitiyā, sambhavesīnaṃ vā anuggahāya. Katame cattāro? Kabaḷīkāro āhāro oḷāriko vā sukhumo vā, phasso dutiyo, manosañcetanā tatiyā, viññāṇaṃ catutthaṃ.

‘‘Ime ca, bhikkhave, cattāro āhārā kiṃnidānā kiṃsamudayā kiṃjātikā kiṃpabhavā?

‘‘Ime cattāro āhārā taṇhānidānā taṇhāsamudayā taṇhājātikā taṇhāpabhavā.

‘‘Taṇhā cāyaṃ, bhikkhave, kiṃnidānā kiṃsamudayā kiṃjātikā kiṃpabhavā?

‘‘Taṇhā vedanānidānā vedanāsamudayā vedanājātikā vedanāpabhavā.

‘‘Vedanā cāyaṃ, bhikkhave, kiṃnidānā kiṃsamudayā kiṃjātikā kiṃpabhavā?

‘‘Vedanā phassanidānā phassasamudayā phassajātikā phassapabhavā .

‘‘Phasso cāyaṃ, bhikkhave, kiṃnidāno kiṃsamudayo kiṃjātikā kiṃpabhavo?

‘‘Phasso saḷāyatananidāno saḷāyatanasamudayo saḷāyatanajātikā saḷāyatanapabhavo.

‘‘Saḷāyatanaṃ cidaṃ, bhikkhave, kiṃnidānaṃ kiṃsamudayaṃ kiṃjātikām kiṃpabhavaṃ?

‘‘Saḷāyatanaṃ nāmarūpanidānaṃ nāmarūpasamudayaṃ nāmarūpajātikām nāmarūpapabhavaṃ.

‘‘Nāmarūpaṃ cidaṃ, bhikkhave, kiṃnidānaṃ kiṃsamudayaṃ kiṃjātikām kiṃpabhavaṃ?

‘‘Nāmarūpaṃ viññāṇanidānaṃ viññāṇasamudayaṃ viññāṇajātikām viññāṇapabhavaṃ.

‘‘Viññāṇaṃ cidaṃ, bhikkhave, kiṃnidānaṃ kiṃsamudayaṃ kiṃjātikām kiṃpabhavaṃ?

‘‘Viññāṇaṃ saṅkhāranidānaṃ saṅkhārasamudayaṃ saṅkhārajātikām saṅkhārapabhavaṃ.

‘‘Saṅkhārā cime, bhikkhave, kiṃnidānā kiṃsamudayā kiṃjātikām kiṃpabhavā?

‘‘Saṅkhārā avijjānidānā avijjāsamudayā avijjājātikām avijjāpabhavā.
meindzai
Posts: 595
Joined: Thu Jan 15, 2009 8:10 pm

Re: Dependent Origination

Post by meindzai »

clw_uk wrote:
meindzai wrote:The description of D.O. that appears in the suttas certainly refers to the three lifetime model, as words like "Death" and "Birth" are pretty unambiguous:

True but the buddha used to types of language, everyday language and dhamma language. Birth in dhamma language just means the birth of "I" at any moment not physical birth, the same for death means death of the "I" at any moment in dhamma language.
Nonsense. I don't know how he could be more specific in his definitions of Birth and Death. "dying, completion of time, dissolution of the aggregates, laying down of the body — this is called death." and "The birth of beings into the various orders of beings, their coming to birth, precipitation [in a womb], generation, manifestation of the aggregates, obtaining the bases for contact — this is called birth" What else could he possibly say that would make it any clearer?
Also it states that the cesstation of dependent origination involves the ending of name and form, if this meant literal name and form then the buddha would have died when he became enlightened would he not?
No, becuase not all cause and effect is immediate. Remember the simplified form of dependent coarising is:

When this is, that is. [immediate cause and effect]
From the arising of this comes the arising of that. [cause and effect over time]

And in reverse:
When this isn't, that isn't.
From the cessation of this comes the cessation of that.

So parts of dependent co-arising have effects over time as well as immediate effects.

I screencapped this from a link that retro provided in a post elsewhere. It's the clearest three lives diagram I've seen (the circular ones confuse me)

Image

The present life is shaped from the conditions from the previous life. So 3-10 are happening now, as a result of 1 and 2 from the previous lifetime. But that doesn't mean ONLY 3-10 are happening now. 1 and 2 are happening now which is conditioning future birth. 11 has already occured in thsi lifetime as well as some...varying degree of 12.

D.O. happening ONLY in this lifetime doesn't make sense becuase birth ultimately has a condition in ignorance. If there were no ignorance, you would not have been born at all - you just simply would not be here reading this. However, in order for you to have had any kind of ignorance in that prior lifetime, there had to be a previous birth, and so on. However this doesn't mean that only certain parts of D.O. are happening now and others are not.

-M
User avatar
bodom
Posts: 7215
Joined: Fri Jan 09, 2009 6:18 pm
Location: San Antonio, Texas

Re: Dependent Origination

Post by bodom »

I think Ajahn Chah sums up this argument pretty well:

You have already studied and read about paticcasamuppada (Dependent Origination) in the books, and what's set out there is correct as far as it goes, but in reality you're not able to keep up with the process as it actually occurs. It's like falling out of a tree: in a flash, you've fallen all the way from the top of the tree and hit the ground, and you have no idea how many branches you passed on the way down. When the mind experiences an arammana [1] (mind-object) and is attracted to it, all of a sudden you find yourself experiencing a good mood without being aware of the causes and conditions which led up to it. Of course, on one level the process happens according to the theory described in the scriptures, but at the same time it goes beyond the limitations of the theory. In reality, there are no signs telling you that now it's avijja, now it's sankhara, then it's viññana, now it's nama-rupa and so on. These scholars who see it like that, don't get the chance to read out the list as the process is taking place. Although the Buddha analysed one moment of consciousness and described all the different component parts, to me it's more like falling out of a tree – everything happens so fast you don't have time to reckon how far you've fallen and where you are at any given moment. What you know is that you've hit the ground with a thud, and it hurts!

:namaste:
Liberation is the inevitable fruit of the path and is bound to blossom forth when there is steady and persistent practice. The only requirements for reaching the final goal are two: to start and to continue. If these requirements are met there is no doubt the goal will be attained. This is the Dhamma, the undeviating law.

- BB
Post Reply