Dependent Origination: Mahavihara account

A discussion on all aspects of Theravāda Buddhism
User avatar
retrofuturist
Posts: 27848
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 9:52 pm
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Contact:

Re: Dependent Origination: Mahavihara account

Post by retrofuturist »

Greetings Anicca,
Anicca wrote:
pt1 wrote:[ Bhikkhu Bodhi's critique of Ven.Nanavira's work will also be helpful.
Sorry but the link does not work.

???
It would be best to read Nanavira's original, then Bhikkhu Bodhi's critique, and then the critique on Bhikkhu Bodhi's critique that's available on the Nanavira website.

If you do it in that order, you'll actually have a proper chance to see and understand what each person is talking about, on their own merits.

If you jump into the chronology part way through you may not be giving people a fair listening to, and merely using it to reinforce your own existing views (which won't do anyone any good). I started with Bhikkhu Bodhi's version, based on someone's recommendation, and now regret doing so. At the time I was looking for the learned Bhikkhu Bodhi to come in, be Theravada's saffron knight in shining armour, and defend the "true Dhamma" against an alleged heretic. In retrospect, I see now that's a terrible and incredibly immature way to approach the Dhamma. Whatever anyone says should be considered on its own merits, with an open mind, assessed against the suttas, and not used as a tool to reinforce or back up ones own prejudices against the unknown. What better way to stay a puthujjana than to cling tenaciously to your views?

That's why I'm glad Shonin wants to see the Mahavihara view first, on its own merits, before looking at the rebuttals. It's the most sensible way to do it. Now, speaking of which...

:focus:

Metta,
Retro. :)
"Whatever is true, whatever is noble, whatever is right, whatever is pure, whatever is lovely, whatever is admirable—if anything is excellent or praiseworthy—think about such things."
User avatar
cooran
Posts: 8503
Joined: Tue Jan 06, 2009 11:32 pm
Location: Queensland, Australia

Re: Dependent Origination: Mahavihara account

Post by cooran »

Hello all,

This link might work:
A Critical Examination of ~Naa.naviira Thera's "A Note on Pa.ticcasamuppaada" - Bhikkhu Bodhi
http://f1.grp.yahoofs.com/v1/4HL3SyYYnD ... navira.doc" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

with metta
Chris
---The trouble is that you think you have time---
---Worry is the Interest, paid in advance, on a debt you may never owe---
---It's not what happens to you in life that is important ~ it's what you do with it ---
User avatar
mikenz66
Posts: 19941
Joined: Sat Jan 10, 2009 7:37 am
Location: Aotearoa, New Zealand

Re: Dependent Origination: Mahavihara account

Post by mikenz66 »

Hi PT, Retro,
pt1 wrote: Regarding more recent developments of treating D.O. as a very fast sequence of steps that can be experienced during insight (as described by Venerables Buddhadasa, Nanavira, etc) - my take on this is that it's in fact an experiential equivalent of the abhidhamma commentarial explanation of sense-door (usually 17 cittas in a fixed sequence) and mind-door (usually 10 cittas in a fixed sequence) processes of cittas, which are said to happen in a fixed way/sequence every time (e.g. see chapter IV, paragraph 6 in A comprehensive manual of abhidhamma). But this is just my speculation on the matter as I can't really know what the Venerables were experiencing when they talked about it as D.O.
Thank you for bringing this up. It makes a lot of sense. The descriptions in the meditation instructions that I'm most familiar with (from the Mahasi) school tend to be in terms of sense door processes. I'm not so familiar with exactly how the teachers who base their understanding on the "fast DO" version phrase it in detail, but in both cases the experiential thing to be focussed on seems to be the rapid rising and falling of phenomena.

As Retro says:
retrofuturist wrote: I think that's a pretty fair assessment actually, and why each respective system is so important to those who utilise it.
retrofuturist wrote: Abhidhammists seem a little disheartened when it is suggested that Abhidhamma is just a philosophy or metaphysical system to conceptually demonstrate the truthfulness of anatta.

Likewise, those who follow a non-Mahavihara version of dependent origination get disheartened when it is said that Dependent Origination is just a philosophy or metaphysical system to conceptually demonstrate how transmigration takes place without an atman.
Why would anyone who has a well-established practise based on one or other paradigm be disheartened? I would have thought the sensible approach would be to just recognise that alternative views exist and some other people appear to find them useful, and move on with your own practise.

As you say:
retrofuturist wrote: Both teachings are available, there to be used, in practice, here and now... not just as the basis of pontification, speculation and profound chin-scratching. When that's all they're reduced to, they're no longer particularly connected to the important matters of suffering and its cessation.
Yes, and one is hardly likely to make much progress on a meditation retreat if one is sitting there wondering which scheme to use to classify the arising phenomena...
retrofuturist wrote: Whether the Mahavihara version is something "to be used, in practice, here and now..." because for all I've read of it, I'm still not sure if I've even seen anyone practically demonstrate how it is to be applied..... or whether you just "accept it" and go to yourself ,"OK". If anyone would care to share their personal experience of the application of the Mahavihara model, I'd be very interested to hear about your experiences and how you practically apply it in your practice.
I think PT already answered that. Teachers using the Commentarial interpretation already have a classification scheme for experiential phenomena in terms of rising and falling of sense-door consciousness and so on. Besides, the contact-feeling-craving-clinging sequence is a present-moment thing no matter what interpretation of DO you subscribe to.

As for the rest of the sequence, I guess it's "applied" in the same way as other teachings, as a basis for reflection and understanding.

Mike
User avatar
Ben
Posts: 18438
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2008 12:49 am
Location: kanamaluka

Re: Dependent Origination: Mahavihara account

Post by Ben »

retrofuturist wrote:Both teachings are available, there to be used, in practice, here and now... not just as the basis of pontification, speculation and profound chin-scratching. When that's all they're reduced to, they're no longer particularly connected to the important matters of suffering and its cessation.
Indeed!
retrofuturist wrote: Whether the Mahavihara version is something "to be used, in practice, here and now..." I'm not sure... because for all I've read of it, I'm still not sure if I've even seen anyone practically demonstrate how it is to be applied..... or whether you just "accept it" and go to yourself ,"OK". If anyone would care to share their personal experience of the application of the Mahavihara model, I'd be very interested to hear about your experiences and how you practically apply it in your practice.
Retro, a message to you from Bhikkhu Nanamoli:
Chs XVI to XVII on understanding are entirely theoretical. Experience in general is dissected, and the separated components are described and grouped in several alternative patterns in Chs XIV to XVI, §1-12. The rest of Ch XVI expounds the Four Noble Truths, the centre of the Buddha’s teaching. After that, dependent origination, or the structure of conditionality, is dealt with in its aspect of arising, or process of being (Ch XVII; as cessation, or Nibbana, it is dealt with separately in Chs XVI and XIX). The formula of dependent origination in its varying modes describes the working economics of the first two truths (suffering as the outcome of craving, and craving itself – see also Ch XVII, n.48). Without an understanding of conditionality the Buddha’s teaching cannot be grasped: “He who sees dependent origination sees the Dhamma” (M.i, 191), though not all details in this work are always necessary. Since the detailed part of this chapter is very elaborate (§58-272), a first reading confined to §1-6, §20-57, and §273-314 might help to avoid losing the thread. These four chapters are theoretical because they contain in detailed form what needs to be learnt, if only in outline, as ‘book learning’ (sotavadhana nana). They furnish techniques for describing the total experience and the experienceable rather as the branches of arithmetic and double-entry book-keeping are to be learnt as techniques for keeping accurate business accounts.

Chs XVIII to Ch XXI, on the contrary, are practical and give instructions for applying the book-knowledge learnt from Chs XVI-XVII by analysing in its terms the meditator’s individual experience, dealing also with what may be expected to happen in the course of development. Ch XVIII as ‘defining of mentality-materiality’ (first application of Ch XIV – XVI) and Chs XIX as ‘discerning conditions’ (first application of Ch XVII) are preparatory to insight proper, which begins in Ch XX with contemplation of rise and fall. After this, progress continues through the ‘eight knowledges’ with successive clarification – clarification of view of the object and consequent alterations of subjective attitude towards it – till a point, called ‘comformity knowledge’, is reached, thrugh one of the ‘three gateways of liberation’, heralds the attainment of the first supramundane path.

-- Introduction to Visuddhimagga p.xliv-xlv
“No lists of things to be done. The day providential to itself. The hour. There is no later. This is later. All things of grace and beauty such that one holds them to one's heart have a common provenance in pain. Their birth in grief and ashes.”
- Cormac McCarthy, The Road

Learn this from the waters:
in mountain clefts and chasms,
loud gush the streamlets,
but great rivers flow silently.
- Sutta Nipata 3.725

Compassionate Hands Foundation (Buddhist aid in Myanmar) • Buddhist Global ReliefUNHCR

e: [email protected]..
User avatar
retrofuturist
Posts: 27848
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 9:52 pm
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Contact:

Re: Dependent Origination: Mahavihara account

Post by retrofuturist »

Greetings Mike,
mikenz66 wrote:Why would anyone who has a well-established practise based on one or other paradigm be disheartened?
Only to the extent that it makes it difficult to have meaningful Dhamma discussions with others on it. Different views on "what's it about?" make subsequent discussions fruitless to impossible... see some of my recent correspondence with pannapetar for an example of this. Or to use another example, if everyone you encountered was a Mahayana Buddhist who thought of Theravada as hinayana, you (plural) would be very hamstrung in terms of having meaningful conversation on concepts and passages from the Pali Canon. Someone with a "well-established practise" may not need quality Dhamma discussion, but I have no doubt they would benefit from it.

Metta,
Retro. :)
"Whatever is true, whatever is noble, whatever is right, whatever is pure, whatever is lovely, whatever is admirable—if anything is excellent or praiseworthy—think about such things."
User avatar
retrofuturist
Posts: 27848
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 9:52 pm
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Contact:

Re: Dependent Origination: Mahavihara account

Post by retrofuturist »

Greetings Ben,
Ben wrote:Retro, a message to you from Bhikkhu Nanamoli...
Thanks - I'll go have a look at those chapters now.

Metta,
Retro. :)
"Whatever is true, whatever is noble, whatever is right, whatever is pure, whatever is lovely, whatever is admirable—if anything is excellent or praiseworthy—think about such things."
User avatar
mikenz66
Posts: 19941
Joined: Sat Jan 10, 2009 7:37 am
Location: Aotearoa, New Zealand

Re: Dependent Origination: Mahavihara account

Post by mikenz66 »

Hi Retro,
retrofuturist wrote:Greetings Mike,
mikenz66 wrote:Why would anyone who has a well-established practise based on one or other paradigm be disheartened?
Only to the extent that it makes it difficult to have meaningful Dhamma discussions with others on it. Different views on "what's it about?" make subsequent discussions fruitless to impossible... see some of my recent correspondence with pannapetar for an example of this. Or to use another example, if everyone you encountered was a Mahayana Buddhist who thought of Theravada as hinayana, you (plural) would be very hamstrung in terms of having meaningful conversation on concepts and passages from the Pali Canon. Someone with a "well-established practise" may not need quality Dhamma discussion, but I have no doubt they would benefit from it.
I don't see the problem. Isn't the sensible strategy to have those quality discussions with people with sufficiently compatible views and just be polite to the rest of the world?

Mike
User avatar
retrofuturist
Posts: 27848
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 9:52 pm
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Contact:

Re: Dependent Origination: Mahavihara account

Post by retrofuturist »

Greetings Mike,
mikenz66 wrote:Isn't the sensible strategy to have those quality discussions with people with sufficiently compatible views and just be polite to the rest of the world?
Sure, I'm not suggesting otherwise.

Metta,
Retro. :)
"Whatever is true, whatever is noble, whatever is right, whatever is pure, whatever is lovely, whatever is admirable—if anything is excellent or praiseworthy—think about such things."
User avatar
retrofuturist
Posts: 27848
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 9:52 pm
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Contact:

Re: Dependent Origination: Mahavihara account

Post by retrofuturist »

Greetings Ben,
Ben wrote:Retro, a message to you from Bhikkhu Nanamoli
Thank you Ben and Bhikkhu Nanamoli.

On reading, it would seem the following sections in that range are pertinent to the subject of how dependent origination is to be experienced or put into practical use by way of the Mahavihara mode of instruction.

XIX - 11,12
XX - 7,8,101,104

Interestingly (and I'm happy for someone to give reason as to why they think it is otherwise), the instruction in those sections would appear to be more aligned to a simplified suttanta description of dependent origination, that the complex paccaya-infused Visuddimagga model with its temporal partitioning and reliance on Abhidhammic principles. In essence, there's nothing in those sections that seems to necessitate one particular mode of dependent origination interpretation over another, so long as the links are understood to be structured in the correct order, as taught by the Buddha. As indicated above, I'd be more than happy to hear from someone who wishes to suggest otherwise, or who thinks there is further utilisation of dependent origination in the XVII-XXI range that I may have missed through my unfamiliarity with the schema.

:reading:

Metta,
Retro. :)
"Whatever is true, whatever is noble, whatever is right, whatever is pure, whatever is lovely, whatever is admirable—if anything is excellent or praiseworthy—think about such things."
pt1
Posts: 417
Joined: Thu Jan 22, 2009 2:30 am

Re: Dependent Origination: Mahavihara account

Post by pt1 »

Anicca wrote: Sorry but the link does not work.
Hm, not sure what's happening, I tried it again, it worked for me, when you click on it - it should try to download the .doc file rather than go to a specific web-page. Either way, thanks to Cooran for an alternative link. I tried attaching it here, but it seems .doc files are not allowed as attachments.

You can also get to that file in the Files section on http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
You'd need to be a member of the group to access it that way though.
retrofuturist wrote:It would be best to read Nanavira's original, then Bhikkhu Bodhi's critique, and then the critique on Bhikkhu Bodhi's critique that's available on the Nanavira website.
Yeah, that would be a good way to research the topic. I also wish more of the Mahavihara commentary was available in English, especially the commentaries to the suttas that deal with D.O. specifically.

Best wishes
Anicca
Posts: 393
Joined: Thu Apr 29, 2010 4:11 am
Location: Edmond, Oklahoma

Re: Dependent Origination: Mahavihara account

Post by Anicca »

pt1 wrote:Hm, not sure what's happening, I tried it again, it worked for me, when you click on it - it should try to download the .doc file rather than go to a specific web-page. Either way, thanks to Cooran for an alternative link.
Must be my connection - still only get "The webpage cannot be found HTTP 404".
pt1 wrote:You can also get to that file in the Files section on http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
You'd need to be a member of the group to access it that way though.
- will join to download.

Thanks

Metta
Shonin
Posts: 583
Joined: Wed Apr 28, 2010 5:11 am

Re: Dependent Origination: Mahavihara account

Post by Shonin »

Thanks for the links and recommendations. I'm just responding from a superficial understanding right now. Here is one fundamental initial question:

Each of these twelve nidanas are said to condition the next, does this mean that the latter nidana does not exist until caused by the former? Or does it mean that both already exist but that conditionality 'flows' only in the direction described? Or does it mean something else?
Last edited by Shonin on Sat May 22, 2010 10:04 pm, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
mikenz66
Posts: 19941
Joined: Sat Jan 10, 2009 7:37 am
Location: Aotearoa, New Zealand

Re: Dependent Origination: Mahavihara account

Post by mikenz66 »

Hi Retro,
retrofuturist wrote:
Ben wrote:Retro, a message to you from Bhikkhu Nanamoli
Thank you Ben and Bhikkhu Nanamoli.

On reading, it would seem the following sections in that range are pertinent to the subject of how dependent origination is to be experienced or put into practical use by way of the Mahavihara mode of instruction.

XIX - 11,12
XX - 7,8,101,104

Interestingly (and I'm happy for someone to give reason as to why they think it is otherwise), the instruction in those sections would appear to be more aligned to a simplified suttanta description of dependent origination, that the complex paccaya-infused Visuddimagga model with its temporal partitioning and reliance on Abhidhammic principles. In essence, there's nothing in those sections that seems to necessitate one particular mode of dependent origination interpretation over another, so long as the links are understood to be structured in the correct order, as taught by the Buddha. As indicated above, I'd be more than happy to hear from someone who wishes to suggest otherwise, or who thinks there is further utilisation of dependent origination in the XVII-XXI range that I may have missed through my unfamiliarity with the schema.
Since I don't find the approach of Ven Nanavira convincing, I don't find the standard interpretation of the Visuddhimagga any more complex. To me, an obvious reading of the Suttas is that some things in the past, some in the future, reading birth and death as having their usual meanings. The stuff in the middle is, on the other hand, very dynamic.

I'm not inclined to go through all of those arguments again. Let's look at the passages Retro mentioned.

As I said in a previous post:
mikenz66 wrote:... the contact-feeling-craving-clinging sequence is a present-moment thing no matter what interpretation of DO you subscribe to.

As for the rest of the sequence, I guess it's "applied" in the same way as other teachings, as a basis for reflection and understanding.
So, in Vism chapter XX the mediator is
XIX 1. Knowledge established by overcoming doubt about the three divisions of time by means of discerning the conditions of that same mentality-materiality is called 'purification by overcoming doubt'.

2. The Bikkhu who wants to accomplish this sets about seeking the cause and condition of that materiality-mentality; just as when a skilled physician encounters a disease he seeks its origin, or just as when a compassionate man sees a tender little child lying on its back on the road he wonders who its parents are.
Then there are several different scenarios that a meditator may follow to achieve this. It seems to me that these involve a combination of reflection and direct knowledge of the presently arising objects to lead to the final conclusion, e.g.:
XIX 10. When he has seen that the occurrence of materiality-mentality is due to conditions in this way, he sees also that, as now, so too in the past its occurrence was due to conditions., and in the future its occurrence will be due to conditions. When he sees it in this way, his uncertainty about the three periods of time is abandoned in the way already stated.
XIX 11, 12 are then reports on alternative ways that other mediators found useful, described in less detail, but with the same conclusion that "... uncertainty is abandoned in the way already stated."

At this point the meditator seems to be clear about kamma and dependent origination. That what arises is due to causes and conditions, and in XIX 26 he sees "by inference from that, all formations are clearly seen as impermanent, ... painful .... not-self..."

XX 7,8 continues in the same sort of way. Everything "past, present, future, is impermanent, formed, dependently arisen, subject to destruction, subject to fall, subject to fading away, subject to cessation."

Now at XX 93-104 we are into the insight sections. In particular, "Knowledge of Rise and Fall". It seems to me that here the focus is much more on the actual experience. Just seeing formations rising an falling. This is said to be a , key step, often misinterpreted as awakening, hence the discussion starting at XX 105 on "The Ten Imperfections of Insight".

XX 93-104 involve a combination of seeing rise and fall in terms of the various analyses, including dependent origination. The meditator understands in terms of all the methods of analyses.

As Mahasi Sayadaw's discussion of this stage says: http://aimwell.org/Books/Mahasi/Progres ... ml#Arising" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Therefore the meditator then believes: "There is no body-and-mind process that cannot be noticed." When examining the characteristics of impermanence, etc., or other aspects of reality, he understands everything quite clearly and at once, and he believes it to be the knowledge derived from direct experience.
If you like the Nanavira interpretation you can certainly read the Visuddhimagga passages using that paradigm. But, as I said above, no version of DO is static, so I don't find it necessary to read it that way.

Thank you for bringing these sections to our attention. The point I would like to end with is that the Visuddhimagga seems to be summarising the experiential knowledge of many people. Far from a dry treatise, it's exactly the sort of thing that a real-life teacher might tell you:
"This meditator found this approach fruitful, another found this useful, ..."

Metta
Mike
User avatar
mikenz66
Posts: 19941
Joined: Sat Jan 10, 2009 7:37 am
Location: Aotearoa, New Zealand

Re: Dependent Origination: Mahavihara account

Post by mikenz66 »

Hi Shonin,
Shonin wrote:Thanks for the links and recommendations. I'm just responding from a superficial understanding right now. Here is one findamental initial question:

Each of these twelve nidanas are said to condition the next, does this mean that the latter nidana does not exist until caused by the former? Or does it mean that both already exist but that conditionality 'flows' only in the direction described? Or something else?
I don't think cause is the right word. These are some of the conditions required. Also note that there are several different expositions of DO in the Suttas, some leaving out some steps, and so on. I would think of the 12-step thing as a kind of standard template, useful for understanding the basic pattern, but not all the details.

Sorry, out of time here. Various Suttas are listed here: http://www.accesstoinsight.org/index-subject.html#ps" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Mike
Shonin
Posts: 583
Joined: Wed Apr 28, 2010 5:11 am

Re: Dependent Origination: Mahavihara account

Post by Shonin »

OK, my mistake - switch the word 'cause' there for 'condition'.
Post Reply