I don’t care about old or new explanations: if only these explanations would fulfill their function: to explain. (Otherwise, you can fall into dogmatism: a sort of Buddhist Taliban.) In that case then perhaps Knowing might be a candidate. It (step by step) explains DO which differs from the 3-life,...

The question already assumes ‘it is so’. And to either go with or against it, both fetters and DO need to be understood. This in itself opens here a can of worms, but lets try to work a little around that. Why is a fetter a fetter? Because it fetters, it binds. And whatever things it binds (thus it ...

Antaradhana wrote: ↑Wed Jul 10, 2019 9:12 pm Avijja, tanha and upadana.

Now why would you claim that?

It is not that fetters fetter; it is your yearning desire what the fetter is.

The suttas appear to say animals can make kamma & realise the Noble Truths. SN 56.120 which includes the stock phrases ending SN 56.131 . If it was easy to travel up it would indicate that the results of ones actions would not be so heavy, easy to avoid, perhaps be random even. Then there might...

SN47.8 Sūda - The Cook

We seek Nibbana because we need to end Samsara It is the stopping of suffering which is sought. Ending samsara could be seen as the byproduct. Even if you become an Arahant you still subject to sickness and suffering. That would be a misunderstanding. The khandhas are not picked up anymore; sufferi...

I think your interpretations are based on overlooking the context and the purpose of me introducing "the self is not real to begin with" which is neither denying nor asserting the self but making a distinction to show how heedfulness is heedlessness in disguise. Though your purpose was no...

It might very well be that I have misunderstood you. Then I apologize for any inconvenience. Unfortunately my interpretation has not yet changed. Perhaps you are able to shine a light on a few parts. I said the self is not real to begin with , which is the main suppressant. Which I read as: "I ...

My line of reasoning is based on the view that the main suppressant is not the impermanent nature of the self, but that the self is not real to begin with hence hatred, greed and delusion will always be its shadow. I don’t believe that you do believe your own view. Your claim: because this “the sel...

Would a shadow ever depart an image? It can be quite deceptive to think that i can overrun my shadow. The image of being heedful will always have heedlessness as its shadow, otherwise, it would not be known/recognized as such. Taking up this example, you then said that the (presence of shadow as a ...

Before going much further we should try to clear up some things, since some later formulations will keep us running in circles while step by step slightly changing the context. So, first this part. It is the presence of heedlessness as a possibility that makes heedfulness of the unenlightened questi...

I am not sure if introducing "understanding the drawbacks of heedlessness" as an intermediate link between heedlessness and heedfulness changes anything. Seeing your logical explanation below, it might be best to “establish” this “intermediate link”, as you seem to refer to this order to,...

I was merely exploring how being our of the possibility of being heedless is a main driver of being heedful. Heedless, normal mind-set so to speak, doesn’t need to reach a limit: If we have enough of distraction with seeing (different) things, we can simply resort to hearing, tasting, etc. There is...

The benefits of heedfulness are obvious to the practitioner, that he/she feels in control and reflects before acting on his/her old habits. He/she acts while knowing what he/she is doing. One could argue that with proper heedfulness one starts to feel less and less in control (yes there is a choice...