Why is birth included in descriptions of dukkha?

A discussion on all aspects of Theravāda Buddhism
User avatar
Ron-The-Elder
Posts: 1909
Joined: Mon Jan 10, 2011 4:42 pm
Location: Concord, New Hampshire, U.S.A.

Re: Why is birth included in descriptions of dukkha?

Post by Ron-The-Elder »

Spiny: "sense-organ, sense-object and sense-consciousness"
If the translation is "sense-object" then I would agree that it is a mental object. If the translation is "sensed object" then it may be an exterior object, which has been sensed by one of the sense-organs, one of which is the brain, the organ from which mind arises. :coffee:

The problem is that all that arises in mind is all that with which we truly come in contact. So, you are right, if we use only our senses, then all we can ever truly experience is contact no matter how an object is sensed. Even as scientific Instruments, such as scanners, meters and gauges are useful, all they give us is a comparison for the purpose of validation and verification. Yet, all the instruments really provide us with is not truly direct experience :shrug: . We still have to "read" and "interpret" the results they provide. The same with photographic and audio equipment. The main advantage is the increase in velocity, capacity, and range, domain, wave-length, frequency, and amplitude of what can be detected beyond our own personal sense doors. :buddha1:

Now, all we need is for someone to invent a "pain detector" that could be used during birth and we could answer the question in your OP. :cry:
What Makes an Elder? :
A head of gray hairs doesn't mean one's an elder. Advanced in years, one's called an old fool.
But one in whom there is truth, restraint, rectitude, gentleness,self-control, he's called an elder, his impurities disgorged, enlightened.
-Dhammpada, 19, translated by Thanissaro Bhikkhu.
vinasp
Posts: 1675
Joined: Tue Aug 18, 2009 7:49 pm
Location: Bristol. United Kingdom.

Re: Why is birth included in descriptions of dukkha?

Post by vinasp »

Hi Spiny,

On sankhara's I found this passage:

"And why, bhikkhus, do you call them volitional formations? (sankhara)
'They construct the conditioned,' bhikkhus, therefore they are called volitional formations. And what is the conditioned that they construct?
They construct conditioned form as form, they construct conditioned feeling
as feeling, they construct conditioned perception as perception, they construct
conditioned volitional formations as volitional formations, they construct
conditioned consciousness as consciousness. 'They construct the conditioned,'
bhikkhus, therefore they are called volitional formations."
[BB, TCDB, part of SN 22.79]

This is not easy to understand.

Also posted on Spiny's new 'sankhara aggregate' thread.

Regards, Vincent.
daverupa
Posts: 5980
Joined: Mon Jan 31, 2011 6:58 pm

Re: Why is birth included in descriptions of dukkha?

Post by daverupa »

Spiny Norman wrote:I still haven't seen a coherent explanation of why birth, aging and death are consistently described as physical events in the suttas if they are not relevant, if the teaching is actually about a purely "non-physical" process.
Well, have a look at SN 12.2. There, we can read:
"Now what is aging and death? Whatever ...weakening of the faculties of the various beings in this or that group of beings, that is called aging.

Whatever ...break up of the aggregates, casting off of the body, interruption in the life faculty of the various beings in this or that group of beings, that is called death.

"And what is birth? Whatever birth, ...appearance of aggregates, & acquisition of [sense] media of the various beings in this or that group of beings, that is called birth.
Birth is surely a physical process, but what dependent origination is trying to do is describe how human beings are, rather than what they are or what they go through - these last would be to make the mistake of considering there to be some agent transferring through the process being discussed, which was Sati's mistake.

Rather, the point seems to be to show that greed for becoming (form, formless, or sensual) will only ever lead to the same sort of problems with dukkha as now (this is to undercut the claim that abiding for lengthy periods in the ancestor lands, or as an immortal, are both actually desireable, which the prevailing cultural narrative had set up - along with sensuality generally - as worthwhile pursuits). Noting this context is very important to understanding things like this.

---

The point, as I understand things, is to see the process and what drives it and what its consequences are, not to analyze the links piecemeal.
  • "And how is it, bhikkhus, that by protecting oneself one protects others? By the pursuit, development, and cultivation of the four establishments of mindfulness. It is in such a way that by protecting oneself one protects others.

    "And how is it, bhikkhus, that by protecting others one protects oneself? By patience, harmlessness, goodwill, and sympathy. It is in such a way that by protecting others one protects oneself.

- Sedaka Sutta [SN 47.19]
Spiny Norman
Posts: 10156
Joined: Fri Mar 05, 2010 10:32 am
Location: Andromeda looks nice

Re: Why is birth included in descriptions of dukkha?

Post by Spiny Norman »

Spiny Norman wrote:I still don't think you've provided clear sutta support for the idea that there are 2 sets of aggregates, one clinging and one non-clinging.
I had another look at SN22.48, but it's not clear whether this passage is describing 2 discreet sets of aggregates ( one clinging and one non-clinging ) or the 2 possible states /modes in which the aggregates can function ( subject to clinging and not subject to clinging ).
Buddha save me from new-agers!
santa100
Posts: 6808
Joined: Fri Jun 10, 2011 10:55 pm

Re: Why is birth included in descriptions of dukkha?

Post by santa100 »

And Ven. Bodhi's SN 22.48 comment which doesn't say they're 2 discreet sets:
This sutta is quoted and discussed at Vism 477-78 (Ppn 14:214-15), in relation to the difference between the aggregates and the aggregates subject to clinging. The key terms distinguishing the pañc’ upadanakkhandha from the pañcakkhandha are sasava upadaniya, “with taints and subject to clinging.” The pañc’ upadanakkhandha are included within the pañcakkhandha, for all members of the former set must also be members of the latter set. However, the fact that a distinction is drawn between them implies that there are khandha which are anasava anupadaniya, “untainted and not subject to clinging.” On first consideration it would seem that the “bare aggregates” are those of the arahant, who has eliminated the asava and upadana. However, in the Abhidhamma all rupa is classified as sasava and upadaniya, and so too the resultant (vipaka) and functional (kiriya) mental aggregates of the arahant (see Dhs §§1103, 1219). The only aggregates classed as anasava and anupadaniya are the four mental aggregates occurring on the cognitive occasions of the four supramundane paths and fruits (see Dhs §§1104, 1220). The reason for this is that sasava and upadaniya do not mean “accompanied by taints and by clinging,” but “capable of being taken as the objects of the taints and of clinging,” and the arahant’s mundane aggregates can be taken as objects of the taints and clinging by others (see As 347). For a detailed study of this problem, see Bodhi, “Aggregates and Clinging Aggregates.”
Spiny Norman
Posts: 10156
Joined: Fri Mar 05, 2010 10:32 am
Location: Andromeda looks nice

Re: Why is birth included in descriptions of dukkha?

Post by Spiny Norman »

santa100 wrote:And Ven. Bodhi's SN 22.48 comment which doesn't say they're 2 discreet sets:
This sutta is quoted and discussed at Vism 477-78 (Ppn 14:214-15), in relation to the difference between the aggregates and the aggregates subject to clinging. The key terms distinguishing the pañc’ upadanakkhandha from the pañcakkhandha are sasava upadaniya, “with taints and subject to clinging.” The pañc’ upadanakkhandha are included within the pañcakkhandha, for all members of the former set must also be members of the latter set. However, the fact that a distinction is drawn between them implies that there are khandha which are anasava anupadaniya, “untainted and not subject to clinging.” On first consideration it would seem that the “bare aggregates” are those of the arahant, who has eliminated the asava and upadana. However, in the Abhidhamma all rupa is classified as sasava and upadaniya, and so too the resultant (vipaka) and functional (kiriya) mental aggregates of the arahant (see Dhs §§1103, 1219). The only aggregates classed as anasava and anupadaniya are the four mental aggregates occurring on the cognitive occasions of the four supramundane paths and fruits (see Dhs §§1104, 1220). The reason for this is that sasava and upadaniya do not mean “accompanied by taints and by clinging,” but “capable of being taken as the objects of the taints and of clinging,” and the arahant’s mundane aggregates can be taken as objects of the taints and clinging by others (see As 347). For a detailed study of this problem, see Bodhi, “Aggregates and Clinging Aggregates.”
Thanks. Yes, I did see that, but it was a bit technical for me. ;)
Buddha save me from new-agers!
Post Reply