Nāma being four kkhandhā?

Explore the ancient language of the Tipitaka and Theravāda commentaries

Moderator: Mahavihara moderator

User avatar
acinteyyo
Posts: 1684
Joined: Mon Jun 01, 2009 9:48 am
Location: Bavaria / Germany

Nāma being four kkhandhā?

Postby acinteyyo » Sun Feb 14, 2010 10:40 am

Thag 1.20. Ajita - I do not fear death; nor do I long for life. I’ll lay down this body, aware and mindful.

User avatar
Cittasanto
Posts: 6524
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 10:31 pm
Location: Ellan Vannin
Contact:

Re: Nāma being four kkhandhā?

Postby Cittasanto » Sun Feb 14, 2010 10:50 am

I hav't read the book, but his talks are transcriptions of talks [edit Books] so maybe there was an error, in the process of transcribing to translating?

without reading the specific section I wouldn't like to guess, I do have this on my computer I think (if it is on Access to insight) so if you can pin point the section closer I will have a look and get back.


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.

User avatar
appicchato
Posts: 1603
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2008 12:47 am
Location: Bridge on the River Kwae

Re: Nāma being four kkhandhā?

Postby appicchato » Sun Feb 14, 2010 11:18 am

It's not at ATI but can be downloaded at:

http://www.forestdhammabooks.com/.../4/ ... amadhi.pdf

User avatar
acinteyyo
Posts: 1684
Joined: Mon Jun 01, 2009 9:48 am
Location: Bavaria / Germany

Re: Nāma being four kkhandhā?

Postby acinteyyo » Sun Feb 14, 2010 12:37 pm

Thag 1.20. Ajita - I do not fear death; nor do I long for life. I’ll lay down this body, aware and mindful.

User avatar
Cittasanto
Posts: 6524
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 10:31 pm
Location: Ellan Vannin
Contact:

Re: Nāma being four kkhandhā?

Postby Cittasanto » Sun Feb 14, 2010 3:49 pm

Chears Bhante, & Mitta
I'll have a read, I did notice on or two small points in Things as they are which don't correspond directly the the sutta, but it isn't so much he is contradicting but looking at it from his own perspective, same thing different angle.


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.

User avatar
Cittasanto
Posts: 6524
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 10:31 pm
Location: Ellan Vannin
Contact:

Re: Nāma being four kkhandhā?

Postby Cittasanto » Sun Feb 14, 2010 4:50 pm

I think it is one of those occasions where the teacher appears to contradict but really isn't.

I have a sense that Luang-ta is being quite specific by using Dhamma instead of Khandha, possibly more expansive in meaning? I do see some dictionaries giving Dhamma the meaning 'norm' and then there is the famous "Mental Quality" rendering, so maybe at a guess he could be refering to the normal naming quality????? (warning probably a bunch of c.......p) only mentioning that as those two translations did jump into my mind when I was reading the dhamma and the page. I will have a proper read of the book from the start to just after that page and hopefully I will be able to help properly?!?!

I am out tonight and tomorrow morning, so tomorrow afternoon


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.

User avatar
mikenz66
Posts: 14947
Joined: Sat Jan 10, 2009 7:37 am
Location: New Zealand

Re: Nāma being four kkhandhā?

Postby mikenz66 » Sun Feb 14, 2010 7:47 pm

HI acinteyyo ,

I wouldn't spend a huge amount of time puzzling over it. In some of the work of Ācariya Mahā Boowa that I have read he specifically state that he takes his understanding from the Forest Tradition, that others may disagree with his terminology, and interpretation, and that he apologises if he got anything wrong. The passage I recall was to to with citta (where he and others in the Ajahn Mun line have been accused of eternalism) but perhaps the same principle applies to what you are reading.

Metta
Mike

rowyourboat
Posts: 1952
Joined: Sat Jan 03, 2009 5:29 pm
Location: London, UK

Re: Nāma being four kkhandhā?

Postby rowyourboat » Sun Feb 14, 2010 10:45 pm

whatever that does not fall under Rupa (material), is nama (mental phenomena) (not strictly true- because of vinnana, but good enough in this case).

In that sense the other 4 aggregates are clearly mental phenomena. I guess the 4 aggregates are not an exhaustive list of mental phenomena unlike in the definition of Nama dhammas.

The 5 aggregates are simply phenomena that beings generally mistake to be the self.
With Metta

Karuna
Mudita
& Upekkha

User avatar
acinteyyo
Posts: 1684
Joined: Mon Jun 01, 2009 9:48 am
Location: Bavaria / Germany

Re: Nāma being four kkhandhā?

Postby acinteyyo » Mon Feb 15, 2010 9:30 am

Thag 1.20. Ajita - I do not fear death; nor do I long for life. I’ll lay down this body, aware and mindful.

User avatar
Cittasanto
Posts: 6524
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 10:31 pm
Location: Ellan Vannin
Contact:

Re: Nāma being four kkhandhā?

Postby Cittasanto » Mon Feb 15, 2010 6:20 pm

Hi Acinteyyo, (mikenz66)

Luang ta actually mentions earlier in the book "forest wisdom" (footnote 8, p16) meaning experience of the meditating monks, although not around this area, or chapter.

I am going to stick with my earlier thoughts, probably excluding what I had a sense of him meaning with Dhamma. It still strikes me as the use of dhamma here is significant in understanding his meaning.


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.

User avatar
acinteyyo
Posts: 1684
Joined: Mon Jun 01, 2009 9:48 am
Location: Bavaria / Germany

Re: Nāma being four kkhandhā?

Postby acinteyyo » Mon Feb 15, 2010 7:47 pm

Thag 1.20. Ajita - I do not fear death; nor do I long for life. I’ll lay down this body, aware and mindful.

User avatar
Cittasanto
Posts: 6524
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 10:31 pm
Location: Ellan Vannin
Contact:

Re: Nāma being four kkhandhā?

Postby Cittasanto » Mon Feb 15, 2010 8:13 pm



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.

rowyourboat
Posts: 1952
Joined: Sat Jan 03, 2009 5:29 pm
Location: London, UK

Re: Nāma being four kkhandhā?

Postby rowyourboat » Mon Feb 15, 2010 11:08 pm

Hi Acinteyyo

The definition of 'nama' comes from the sutta quote you posted. It clearly lists mental elements of experience. You may wish to look up the meanings of each if you like. There has never been any controversy regarding this. The only 'controversy' or should I say misclassification is with vinnana. The commentaries classify it under nama while the suttas don't.

I like the get down to the actual experience:

flower(rupa)+eye(rupa) --> eye consciousness-->eye-contact (nama), feelings (nama), perceptions (nama), fabrications (nama)

The delineate nama and rupa (ie to come to the insight of nama-rupa paricceda nana) it is important to see this process happening.

with metta
With Metta

Karuna
Mudita
& Upekkha


Return to “Pāli”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 guests

Google Saffron, Theravada Search Engine